aed Bais
oe snieres

‘ nae

|

‘J

Gornell University Library
Sthaca, New York

Ml Unt ity Lib
BS1515 C53 1886

Tiinniiatiy

924 029 305 4

olin

Cornell University

Library

The original of this book is in
the Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029305427

THE
PROPHECIES OF ISAIAH

VOL. I

PROPHECIES OF ISA0TAH

A NEW TRANSLATION

WITH COMMENTARY AND APPENDICES

BY THE

REV, 1. kK CHEYNE,. MOA:

HONORARY D.D. EDINBURGH

ORIEL PROFESSOR OF EXEGESIS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

IN TWO VOLUMES

VOL. I.

FOURTH EDITION, REVISED

NEW YORE
THOMAS WHITTAKER
2 & 3 BIBLE HOUSE
1886

Aes

TO THE

REV. BROOKE FOSS WESTCOTT, DD.

REGIUS PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE

THIS ATTEMPT TO COMBINE MODERN METHODS OF EXEGESIS
WITH FIDELITY TO ANCIENT TRUTH
IS BY PERMISSION

DEDICATED

PREFACE

—+o

Tue first edition of this first volume appeared in 1880,
the second in 1882. I have done my best to make
the third edition worth procuring even for those who
already possess the first. Very many passages will
reveal traces of a revision which, if not so thorough
as that which Delitzsch is in the habit of giving, is
yet not superficial, and which witnesses to the author's
belief that in the study of the prophets nothing is
trivial or insignificant. The results of Assyriological
research have again, to the best of my power, been
sifted and utilised, so that M. Maspero’s complaint
that ‘les hébraisants rejettent systématiquement I’aide
que pourrait leur offrir lantiquité égyptienne et
assyrienne’ less than ever applies to the present
work. I may have erred, but it seemed worthier of
a student of the Old Testament to qualify himself to
some extent for a personal judgment, than either to
stand aloof and wait for others, or to transfer in
pellmell confusion all the various illustrations of the
Old Testament proposed by Assyriologists. Something,
too, has been attempted for the further correction of
the text; the slowness with which I have, since my
first contributions in 1868, moved towards critical inde-
pendence will, I hope, be a guarantee that I have no

Viil PREFACE.

parti pris against tradition. The ‘critical notes’ in
the second volume have received numerous additions ;
and if I am to a great extent eclectic, yet there will
be found evidence of personal judgment and mature
principle. How far any fresh light has been thrown
in this edition on the meaning and the progress of
religious ideas I cannot venture to say. I have, at
any rate, proved my continued adherence to the his-
torical principles gained long since from Ewald. A
not unfriendly reviewer, from the secure vantage-
cround of a German university, has, I observe, ac-
cused me of theological bias in some parts of the
exegesis in the second volume, though he as good
as acquits me of any in the first. I have re-examined
the sentences in which such a bias may be detected
in the first, and will make some reply to him in the
preface to the second volume. It will be easy, for
there is no fundamental difference between us. But
I may at least ask here, Where zs the commentary
entirely free from theological or philosophical bias ?
It has, at any rate, been my own object, as a com-
mentator, to confine my theological bias within the
narrowest possible area, and to meet the curiosity
which in England is so generally felt as to the ten-
dencies of an author in one of the essays attached to
the commentary. The same remark applies to my
critical bias. I cannot pretend to be without at least
provisional conclusions. I am not so modest as to
think that I have made no contributions to critical
thought. These conclusions or contributions may
here and there have influenced my exegesis, but not,
as I think, unduly; and certainly not so much as the

PREFACE. iX

bias of more orthodoxly critical commentators both
of the ‘right’ and of the ‘left’ has affected their
exegesis. My constant effort has been to suppress
myself as a critic as much as possible, though I con-
sidered myself bound, as far as I could, to acquaint
the student (see Essay VI.) with the present state of
one important part of the critical controversy. In
this connection I may quote a sentence or two from
the preface to the first edition of this volume. ‘It
appears to the author that a more thorough exegesis
must (in England and America) precede the fruitful
investigation of critical problems. It is the interest
of all parties to ascertain the exegetical data, and
these he has endeavoured to set down impartially,
without allowing himself to be deterred by accusa-
tions of inconsistency, such as even his earlier work?
was exposed to from the Speaker's Commentary on
Isaiah. If it is a fact that the exegetical phenomena
are conflicting, let them be fairly represented as such ;
the final critical solution will have to take account of
all the data of the problem.’

The prospects of Old Testament study in England
are more hopeful now than when I first began to
write. Free and reverent investigation is at least
sincerely tolerated, though within my own range of
observation it has not received much countenance

1 This work on Isaiah, published in 1870, contained an amended
version, which aimed at reconciling in some degree English style and
Hebrew scholarship. Mr. Matthew Arnold (in his Jsazah of Jerusalent)
censures the translation in the present work precisely as if its object was
the same as that of my earlier attempt. I have not recalled the latter ;
indeed, it partly supplements the present work, especially in the intro-

duction, which contains a moderate statement of the anti-traditional
point of view scarcely as yet superseded.

x PREFACE,

from the authorities. We have still to live in hope
in this as in so many other respects. A single pro-
fessorship at each of our national universities will not
always be held sufficient for a study which ramifies
in so many directions as that of the Old Testament.’
If I may refer to but one of its departments, Old
Testament Exegesis has, so far as I am aware, no
official recognition in the English universities’’ though,
at Oxford at least, the interpretation of the New
Testament is not unfairly represented by two learned
professors. Isolated students of this and other sections
of the subject may no doubt be found, but what the
study requires is a small band of qualified scholars
who are at the same time teachers, and who have
distributed among themselves the different depart-
ments of this wide field of research. As yet we hear
little said about these things in the organs of Church
and University opinion, and it may therefore be unfair
to expect much help from those who officially have
the means of giving it. But the horizon is, as I said,
not without gleams of hope. Men of the younger
generation, trained in a more historic school than
their elders, are at least friendly to critical investiga-
tions; and if the energies of most of them are absorbed
by the questions of the hour, yet there are some left
who can give more than a friendly regard, and to
those I appeal, out of my unwilling seclusion, to take

? I am most glad to be able to refer to the Inaugural Lecture of
Professor Driver at Oxford (as reported in the Z7mes), which describes
these ramifications. Compare also the sketch of the field of Old Testa-
ment study in my own Essay on the Maintenance of the Study of the
Bible in Essays on the Endowment of Research (Lond., 1876). To the
practical suggestions of that essay I should not now commit myself.

° T gratefully retract this (February, 1886),

PREFACE. xi

their part distinctly and ungrudgingly, in spite of all
discouragements, in a work of which few can estimate
the beneficial results, and for the want of which not
only philology, but theology and the Church in general
suffer—the application of modern methods to the
criticism and exegesis of the Old Testament.

*,* The reader will kindly refer to the ‘Critical Notes’ and
‘Last Words’ in the second volume, which sometimes explain or
illustrate the translation and commentary, and especially to the
emendations of the text due to the late Dr. Weir, Professor of
Hebrew in the University of Glasgow. Specimens of Dr. Weir’s
exegesis have also been given; but this, though generally sober,
and sometimes very clear-sighted, is by no means so remarkable as
his criticism of the text. I am much indebted to Dr. Weir's repre-
sentatives for permission to examine his note-books, and am glad
thus to honour the memory of a singularly fresh and candid mind,

ADDENDUM.—On xliv. 4 (p. 283). There is great doubt whether
the best Massoretic reading is }22 ‘amidst’ (?), or 33 ‘as amidst ’
() being defective) or ‘as young (grass).’ The Sept. reading is
preferable.

CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE.

(On the complicated question of the chronology of this period, see
Vol. II. of Dunckers History; Wellhausen, ‘Die Zeitrechnung des
Buchs der Kénige seit der Theilung des Reiches,’ in Jahrédicher fiir
deutsche Theologze, Vol. XX. (1875), pp. 607-640; Schrader, K. A. T7.,
ed. 2, pp. 458-468; Kamphausen, Dze Chronologie der hebraischen
Konige (1883); Robertson Smith, Zhe Prophets of Israel, pp. 144-151,
402, 413-419.)

B.C"

740? Death of Uzziah. (So too Duncker ; Wellhausen, 750; Kamp-
hausen, 736.)

734. Expedition of Tiglath-Pileser against Damascus, Israel, and
Philistia ; tribute of Yahukhazt Yahudai, i.e. Jehoahaz
(=Ahaz) the Judahite, to Assyria.

727. Accession of Shalmaneser.

724? Accession of Hezekiah. (D., 728; W. and K., 714.)

722. Accession of Sargon and fall of Samaria.

720. Great defeat of Egypt at Raphia.

713? Merodach Baladan’s embassy to Hezekiah.

711. Sargon’s siege of Ashdod, and (probably) invasion of Judah;
Hezekiah’s illness.

710. Sargon’s conquest of Babylon.

jog. Capture of Merodach Baladan.

705. Accession of Sennacherib.

701. Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah.

681. Accession of Esar-haddon.

672. Esar-haddon’s conquest of Egypt.

586. Nebuchadnezzar’s capture of Jerusalem,

539. Capture of Babylon by Cyrus.

536. First return of Jewish exiles.

PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS.

II. Zsazah. Second part of the Book of Isaiah.

I.C. A. ‘The Book of Isaiah Chronologically Arranged’ (by the
present writer).

Q. P. B. ‘The Holy Bible, &c., with Various Renderings and
Readings’ (published by Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, Printers to
the Queen).

kK. A. T. ‘Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament, von Eber-
hard Schrader’ (2nd ed., Giessen, 1883).

XK. G. F. ‘Keilinschriften und Geschichtsforschung.’ Same author
(Giessen, 1878).

A. £. Aben Ezra (also referred to in the commentary as Ibn Ezra).

Bi. Bickell. La. Lagarde.

Caly. Calvin. Lo. Lowth.

Del. Delitzsch. Lu, Luz. Luzzatto.
Ew. Ewald. Naeg. Naegelsbach.
Ges. Gesenius. Olsh. Olshausen.
Gesch. Geschichte. Pesh. Peshito.
Ffend. Henderson. Sept. Septuagint.
flengst. Hengstenberg. Symut. Symmachus.
Hitz. Hitzig. Tare. Targurn.
ffoub. Houbigant. Theod. Theodotion.
Knob. Knobel. We., Wellh. Wellhausen.
Kr, Krochmal.

Rk. P. Records of the Past (12 vols., Bagster).

fT. S. B.A. Transactions of Society of Biblical Archzeology.

Vitr. Vitringa. | Vulg. Vulgate.

Z.D. AL. G. Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlindischen Gesellschaft.

ISAIAH.

CHAPTER I.

‘THE Great Arraignment’ is the title appropriately suggested by Ewald
for this prophecy. Jehovah is the plaintiff, Israel the defendant, the
prophet a deeply interested bystander and interlocutor. Hence the
prophecy naturally falls into four symmetrical stanzas or strophes, divid-
ing at vv. 10, 18,24 (Ewald, Drechsler). Str. 1. contains the charge, with
an appeal to the witnesses ; 11. meets a preliminary objection of Israel’s
to the production of a charge; 1. offers reconciliation on condition of
Israel’s amendment ; Iv. fulminates the judgment which the rejection of
this gracious offer renders inevitable. The prophecy begins by addressing
the whole people as equally guilty ; then directs itself more especially
to the higher classes ; and, last of all, anticipates that some will be con-
verted, and so escape destruction. There is no finer specimen of pro-
phetic oratory than this (see on v. 10).

It is difficult to say when this prophecy was most probably composed,
or rather, it was difficult in the infancy of Assyrian studies. Hence we
find, among the elder critics, Caspari! referring to the period of Uzziah
and Jotham; Ges. and Knob. to that of Ahaz; Vitr., Hitz., Ewald, to
that of Hezekiah. The fact is that, in some respects, it might have been
written almost equally well in any one of these periods, which suggests
that it was designed, in its present form, as a preface to a larger or
smaller collection of Isaiah’s prophecies. Still it would be strange if
Isaiah had been able altogether to exclude references to passing events,
nor does he appear to have done so. He tells us that the land of Judah
has been flooded with a foreign soldiery—‘ your land, strangers devour
it’ (v. 7), a description which points rather to the Assyrians than to an
army partly composed of Israelites (vii. 1). There are no points of con-
tact between this prophecy and those composed (see é,g, chap. xxxiii.)
with reference to Sennacherib’s invasion. It must therefore have been
composed Jefore that event,—not afer it (Oort), as there is no allusion to
the collapse of the Assyrian enterprise. There seems no alternative but
to suppose Isaiah to refer to the first Assyrian inyasion of Judah, viz. that
of Sargon.? He wrote, probably, after the stress of the storm had passed,

1 See especially his Bettrage zur Einl. in das Buch Fesaja, part i,
2 Why such an invasion is held to be probable, if not certain, is explained in intro-

duction to chap. x. 5-xii. 6

VOL. I. B

2 ISAIAII. [CHAP. I.
or even when the invasion was over, for during a calamity it was not his
wont to speak so roughly and discouragingly. Indeed, he speaks quite
as much to the next generation as to the men of his own time; it is
a purely literary product that we have before us. As he depicts the
sufferings caused by the invasion (zy. 7-9), he deepens the shadows to
impress the future readers of his prophecies. He offers not so mucha
realistic account of what actually took place, as what might and must
result from a continued neglect of true religion. (From this point of view,
comp. the éyxarakepOnoera of LXX. and the derelinguetur of Vulg.)
And yet his description is based upon facts, and is not entirely imagina-
tive. The sketch of the moral and religious condition of Judah applies
at any rate to some extent to the reign of Hezekiah, whose reformation
was only superficial. The crimes imputed to the princes in vv. 15, 18,
21 (only mentioned again in Isaiah’s earliest discourses, iv. 4, v. 7), and
the openness of the ‘ apostasy,’ are no less characteristic of the reign of
Ahaz, to which Delitzsch still refers it. The theory that chap. i., though
written in the reign of Hezekiah, was designed as an introduction to
prophecies of various periods, enables us to reconcile all the conflicting
data.

' VISION of Isaiah, son of Amoz, which he saw concerning
Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz,

and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.

1The heading, in its present
form, belongs to the whole of the
prophecies of Isaiah. There may,
however, have been a time when it
stood at the head of a smaller por-
tion of prophecy, for the words
‘concerning Judah and Jerusalem’
do not suit all the prophecies.
Vitringa supposes the heading to
have been originally written for
chap. i., and to have had the con-
cluding words (‘in the days of,
&c.) added to it by the scribes
who collected Isaiah’s works into a
volume. But as the very similar
heading to chap. ii. belongs to a
group of prophecies (ii.-v.), it is
reasonable to suppose that the
heading of chap. i. once did like-
wise. It cannot, indeed, have been
penned by Isaiah, if (as is most
probable) none of the prophecies
were really written in the reign of
Uzziah. Here, as in the case of
the headings of the Psalms, we
seem driven to assume the handi-
work of the scribes during the Exile,
a period when the study of the re-
ligious writings formed the chief

° Hear, O heavens, and give

consolation of the pious. The same
writer, or writers, may have pre-
fixed the headings of Hosea and
Micah, and perhaps of some of the
other books, also of Isaiah ii. and
xiii. (note the similarity of form).
Vision] Perhaps collectively
for ‘visions’; occurs again in the
headings of Nahum and Obadiah.
A technical term for the prophetic
intuitions or inward perceptions.
A synonymous phrase is ‘hearing’
(xxvill. 22; comp. xxi. 10). He
who ‘makes to see’ is of course
Jehovah (Am. vii. 1), through the
objective influence of His Spirit
(see on vili, tr). Thus ‘vision’=
prophetic revelation (comp. 1 Sam.
ili. 15), just as ‘seer’ = prophet ;
but while ‘seer’ was early sup-
planted by ‘ prophet’ (ad7), 1 Sam.
1x. 9, ‘vision’ held its ground till a
much later time (Dan. ix. 23, 1 Chr.
xvii. 15). ‘Prophecy’ (wba),
only occurs thrice (2 Chr. ix. 29,
xv. 8, Neh. vi. 12). And Seru-
salem] i.e. especially Jerus., Isaiah
being distinctively a city-prophet.

* Hear, O heavens] i.c., either:

CHAP. I.]

ISATAH. 3

ear, O earth, for Jehovah speaketh: sons I have made great

and high, and they have broken away from me.

3 The ox

knoweth his owner, and the ass its master’s crib: Israel is
without knowledge, my people is without understanding.
‘Alas for the sinful nation, the people burdened with guilt,
the seed of evil doers, the sons that do corruptly: they have
forsaken Jehovah, they have spurned Israel’s Holy One, they

have withdrawn backward.

5 Why * will ye be still smitten

® On what part, Vulg., Lowth, Ew.

Bear witnessto the judicial sentence
which Jehovah is about to deliver
(cf. Deut. iv. 26, xxx. 19, xxxi. 28,
Ps. 1. 4, Jer. vi. 19); or, since Je-
hovah is speaking rather in sorrow
than in anger, Listen with reverence
to Jehovah your Creator, whom His
rational creatures refuse to hear, cf.
Jer. ii. 12. Many find here an al-
Jusion to Deut. xxxii. 1, but (apart
from the question as to the date
of Deuteronomy) there is so much
greater depth of feeling in the
passage of Isaiah that one is loth
to admit an imitation, The expres-
sions (see Lowth) are the common
property of poets. The tenderness
of these opening verses reminds us
of Hosea, as the section vv. 10-20
reminds us by its severity of Amos.
—Sons] This word is placed in
the forefront to account for the
singular favours about to be men-
tioned, What can a loving parent
refuse to his sons? I have
made great and high] i.e,, I have
reared Israel to maturity, and set
him on high among the nations.
Comp. Hos. 1. 10 Rebelled]
The highest degree of sin. ‘For he
addeth unto his sin rebellion,’ Job

xxxiv. 37,°.. . sons of the living
God’ (xi. 1, Ex. iv. 22).
3 The ox... ] So Jeremiah

(viii. 7) contrasts the insensibility of
Israel with the sagacity of the stork.

4 Seed of evil doers] i.e., a seed
(or race), consisting of—not de-
scended from—evil doers. Comp.
xiv. 20, Ixv. 23, where the context
is clearer than here-——¥Foersaken
ae ta spurned . withdrawn
backward] Observe the climax—

alienation, insult, idolatry. On the.
implication in the last phrase, see
Ezek. xiv. 3. It is, however, not so
much outward idolatry which is
referred to, as the idolatry of the
heart ; see on wv. 21. Israel's
Holy One] i.e, He who shows
himself holy in the midst of Israel.
Holiness is an idea which has had
a long history, and it is not easy to
realize it in its original simplicity.
In Isaiah’s mind, however, it evi-
dently stood in close relation to the
conception of the Divine glory. In
vi. 3 the Trisagion is accompanied
by ‘The whole earth is full of his
glory” But Isaiah himself indi-
cates a distinction already developed
between God’s glory and His holi-
ness. The sense of creaturely
weakness is awakened by the
thought of the one (vi. 5, first
clause), the consciousness of trans-
gression by that of the other (vi. 5,
second and foll. clauses) ; and this
because, whereas the glory of God
extends overall nature, His holiness
is specially exhibited in judicial
interpositions within the sphere
of His kingdom. And yet the
Israelites, who owed so much to
these interpositions, displayed, not
contrite awe but insulting contempt,
(On Holiness see Oehler, 7heology
of the Old Testament, i. 154, &c.,
Duhm, Die Theologieder Propheten,
169-172; Baudissin, Studien zur
semit, Religionsgeschichte, ii. 1-142,
Delitzsch, art. ‘ Heiligkeit’ in
Herzog-Plitt’s Real-Encyclopidte,
Krier, Essaz sur la théologie
@ Esaie xi.-lxvi., pp. 19-26.)

5 why will ye.. |

Why
B2

4 ISATATL.

going on in apostasy ?
faint.

(CHAP. I.

Every "head is sick, and every” heart
6 From the sole of the foot even to the head there is

no sound part in it; wounds and wales and festering sores—
not pressed, and not bound up, and not softened with oil.
7Yonr land—a desolation, your cities—burnt with fire, your
tillage—in your face strangers devour it ; even a desolation,

like the overthrow of * Sodom.

8 And the daughter of Zion is

left as a booth in a vineyard, as a lodging-place in a cucumber-

> The whole, Ew.

bring down fresh judgments upon
your head through persisting in
your infidelity ? Kay well compares
Ezek. xviil. 31. (On the rend. see
Del. and Kay.) Every head is
sick ... ] Instead of descending
from the public to the private
calamity, the prophet adopts the
more striking plan of ascending
from the individual to the body,
corporate. He singles out the two
noblest members of the body, the
seats of the intellectual and moral
life. There is not a head nor a
heart which has escaped the infec-
tion of sin. Cf. Jer. xvii. 9. ‘The
heartis .. wofully sick, Gen. viii.
21%

° Fromthe sole... | Itisthe
state which is thus characterised
(cf. x. 16, xvii. 4). The meaning of
the figures is determined by that of
the figures in vw. 5. The inward
sickness of the individual produces
amass of moral corruption in the
nation, and no attempt has been
made to apply a remedy. ‘ Binding
up’ is a well-known figure for spi-
ritual regeneration, Hos. xiv. 4, Ps.

xli. 4. § To heal’ (7a/@) in Hebrew
means properly to sew up a
wound,

7 The condition of the land is as
sad as that of the people. The
wild soldiery of Sargon has
wrought a ruin only comparable to
that of Sodom. But the men of
Sodom were foreigners, Israel is a
‘son. It was a painful surprise to
the Israelites that their land could
become the prey of the Gentiles,
comp. Ixiii 19, Jer. a. 25. [On the

¢ So Ew., Studer, Lagarde.

Text has, strangers.

reading, see crit. note. The text-
read. seems to me scarcely translat-
able. The conjecture‘... of a
rain-storin’ is plausible (comp. Ps.
xc. 5); but 1, the verb ‘overturn’ is
specially appropriated to the ‘ cata-
strophe’ of Sodom and Gomorrah
(xiii. 19, Am. iv. 11, Jer. xlix. 18,
1. 40, Deut. xxix. 23 [22], and 2, we
should not expect, in so artistically
composed a chapter, to find zérem
so close to zarim—a _ confusion
would be unavoidable.]

8 There is one qualification to
be made; the capital remains, but
how forlorn and helpless! See
Notes and Criticisms, p. 2.
The daughter of Zion] A highly
poetical phrase, here and in general
a personification of the city and
inhabitants of Jersusalem. Some-
times, however, it seems to mean
the city without the inhabitants
(Lam. 1i. 8); sometimes the in-
habitants without the city (Mic. iv.
IO). As a booth. .a lodg-
ing-place] Temporary shelters
for the watchmen. See xxiv. 20,
xxvii. 3 (note), Job xxvii. 18 ; also
Trench’s instructive note, Parades,
p-195,and Wetzstein’s in Delitzsch,
fTfiob, p. 318. As a besieged
city] This is very difficult to har-
monise with the preceding figures.
Can Isaiah have written thus? Dr.
Weir's conjecture is very ingenious.
True, Jerusalem had walls, but it
might as well have been without
them, for the Assyrian ‘ despiseth
cities’ (or citadels), xxxiii. 8. See
the Hebr. of Prov. xxv. 28, 2 Chr,
XXX. 5.

CHAP. I.]

ISAIAH. 5

field, as a “besieged city. ® Had not Jehovah Sabdoth left us
a remnant, [almost *] like Sodom should we be, Gomorrah

should we resemble !

1 Hear the word of Jehovah, ye judges of Sodom ; give

4 Fort of watch (comp. 2 Kings xvii. 9), Hitz., Ges. (Zesaurus),—City broken

through, z.e. defenceless, Weir (conj.).

© Omitted in Sept., Pesh., Vulg. ; comp.

® The first revelation closes with
a reflection in the name of the
people. It is touching to see how
the prophet’s human feelings force
an utterance. He seems to feel
that the statement in wv. 7 was too
strong: — ‘not yet quite like
Sodom. ’ Jehovah SabActh]
The phrase is used as a kind of
seal or attestation to a specially
solemn prophecy. This has be-
come almost a rule with most of
the prophets. Yet there are some
exceptions, as Ewald remarks.
Hosea, Ezekiel, and Micah (if, as
many Critics think, iv. 1-4 is quoted
by Micah from another prophet)
avoid it altogether. Jehovah Sa-
bdoth is, I think, a fuller, and more
expressive proper name for the God
(primarily) of Israel : more expres-
sive than Jehovah alone in that it
lays special stress on his supra-
mundane being, thus becoming
equivalent to the latter phrase ‘the
God of heaven,’ 2 Chr. xxxvi. 23,
Neh. i. 4, 5, Ps. cxxxvi. 26, (Gen.
xxiv. 3, 7°), &c. See also Appen-
dix to this chapter.

10 Yet strange to say, the princi-
pal men of Jerusalem think they
have completely discharged their
religious obligations. A second
revelation dispels this illusion.
By an apostrophe which Stein-
thal the philologist pronounces
unequalled, the prophet addresses
them as Judges of Sodom (comp.
iii. 9, and, with Dr. Kay, Deut.
xxxil. 32). Into this short phrase
he condenses the philosophy of
their misfortunes. So severe a
punishment argues -a more than
commonly heinous offence. Out of
this passage perhaps the Arabs have
distilled the proverb, ‘ More unjust
than a kadee of Sodom’ (4a¢z =
kalsin, the word used by Isaiah,

Rom. ix. 29 (after Sept.). So Geiger.

and in a similar context by Micah
iii. 9). Obs., no mention is made
of the king. The judges seem to
have acquired the whole executive
power, and to have greatly impaired
the royal prerogative (cf. Jer.
XXXVili. 5).—— The instruction of
our God] A. V. renders ‘the law,’
implying, as usual, a reference to
the Mosaic law. This, however,
is doubtful at best. The word
(T6rah), rendered ‘teaching, means
etymologically, ‘direction,’ or ‘in-
struction,’ and hence was the suit-
able term for the authoritative
counsel given orally by the priests
(Deut. xvii. 11) and prophets to
those who consulted them on points
of ritual and practice respectively.
It is unsafe, therefore, in the ma-
jority of passages to render Zorah
‘law’ (with A.V.), when ‘instruc-
tion’ or ‘revelation ’ will suit all the
requirements of the context. See
Isa. ii. 3, viii, 16, xlii. 4, Jer. xviii.
18, Ezek. vii. 26, Hag. ii. 11, Zech.
vil. 12 ; and especially Jer. xxvi. 4,
5, where, ‘to walk in my Torah’
is parallel to ‘to hearken to the
words of my servants the prophets.’
There are, indeed, a few passages
where some modern critics render
Torah ‘law? ‘The written law of
Moses had come into general
acceptance from the days of Josiah,’
and ‘the “law” already presented
itself during the Exile as the one
lofty object which, despised and
rejected now, would in the future
once more win from all mankind a
lofty reverence and unique acknow-
ledgment. So writes Ewald,
referring to Isa. xlii. 4, 21, li. 4, 7,
Lam. ii. 9 (2°), Ezek. vii. 26 (/zs-
tory of Israel, v. 133). Even here,
however, the sense ‘(prophetic)
revelation’ is quite satisfactory.
The Book of II Isaiah is not con-

6 ISAIAH.

[cHar. 1.

ear to the instruction of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.
1 Of what use is the multitude of your sacrifices to me? saith
Jehovah ; I am satiated with the burnt-offerings of rams, and
the fat of fed beasts, and in the blood of bullocks and lambs

and he-goats I have no pleasure.

1#2When ye come to ‘sce

my face, who hath required this at your hands—to trample
f So Pesh. Luz., Geiger.—Appear before me, Ew., Del., Naeg. (after Hebrew

vowel-points ).

cerned with legal ordinances ; Ezek.
vii. 26 is explained by Deut. xvii.
11; and in Lam. ii. 9 Zorah is
parallel to ‘ (prophetic) vision.’ The
only absolutely certain reference to
the Pentateuch is in Mal. iv. 4.
(Am. ii. 4, and Hos. vill. 12 appear
to allude to early compends of
laws.) The context, however, shows
that such a reference cannot be in-
tended here, and that Torah means
the revelation which Isaiah is about
to communicate.

1 The ‘judges of Sodom’ may
multiply sacrifices, but Jehovah
attaches no value to them. Not
that Isaiah intends to condemn
ritual altogether, any more than St.
James does (i. 26, 27). His utter-
ance must be qualified by what he
tells us himself of his early vision
(see vi. 6), and by a consideration
of his circumstances. He was not
only a prophet, but a reformer, or
at any rate the friend of a reform-
ing king, and it is not probable that
he was inwardly hostile to the very
foundations of the established order
of things. It is true, however, that
the duties of religion which he
most inculcates are the moral ones,
and that he is no friend to the exist-
ing priesthood (xxviii. 7) He
seems rather to tolerate forms than
to recommend them. For state-
ments of contemporary prophets,
see Am. v. 21-24, Hos. vi. 6 (‘and
not sacrifice’=‘more than burnt-
offerings’), Mic. vi. 6-8. Sacri-
fices] Isaiah means those in which
the life of a victim was taken. Of
this class, the most important were
the burnt-offerings. The mention
of rams may perhaps point to
guilt-offerings (see on liii. 10), the
only kind of sacrifice limited to a

ram in Leviticus. Or, if our
Leviticus be of late date, the
‘rams’ may be a vestige of the
high estimate of rams in primitive
times (cf. Gen. xxii. 13). ‘Fat? is
mentioned because, except in burnt-
offerings, the fat pieces were burnt;
“blood, because in all the sacrifices
of this class the blood was sprinkled
on the altar.

12 To see my face] (On reading,
see crit. note.) To ‘see God,’ men
must be ‘pure in heart’ (Matt. v.
8), or, in the words of a Psalmist,
‘the upright shall behold his coun-
tenance’ (Ps. xi. 7). Itis therefore
a purely formal and imaginary see-
ing which the prophet refers to—a
vestige probably of that unspiritual
stage when the Israelites wor-
shipped God under the form of
images (Judg. xvii. 3, 4, 1 Kings
xii. 28, 29). The prohibition of
idolatry did not extinguish this
merely formal religion, for the
invisible God could still, it was
thought, be propitiated through the
Temple-ritual. It was not every-
one who could reconcile the sanc-
tity of the Temple with the illimit-
able character of the Divine Being
as it is reconciled in the beautiful
‘prayer of Solomon’ (1 Kings viii.
27-30). The phrase, ‘to see God,’
is therefore a relic of what may be
called roughly the pre-prophetic or
pre-Mosaic age. It is not merely,
as Hupfeld thinks, a metaphor from
a royal court, into which only a
select few could have ingress. The
‘face of God’ was no doubt a sym-
bolic expression, but one of a less
commonplace order than the emin-
ent critic supposes. It represents
in the old Semitic religious systems
generally that aspect of the Divine

CHAP. 1.] ISAIAH. 7

my courts? "Bring no more false %offerings: a sweet
smoke’ is an abomination to me; the new moon and the
sabbath, ' the calling of a convocation. ... I cannot bear
wickedness together with a solemn assembly. Your new
moons and your set days my soul hateth; they are an en-
cumbrance to me, I am weary of bearing. And if ye
spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you ;
even if you make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands
are full of blood. ‘Wash ye, make you clean, take away the
evil of your works from before mine eyes; cease to do evil,

& Meal-offerings ; incense, Ew., Del., Naeg.
h So the accents and most moderns, Auth. Vers. (and Kay) follows Sept., Aq.,

Symm., Theod., Vulg. See crit. note.

Being which was turned towards
man; and this aspect, it may be
added, was regarded as personal
(comp. Ex. xxxiii. 14). Does not
this seem to explain the prayer in
Ps. xvii. 15, ‘ May I be satisfied,
when I awake, with thine image’
(comp. Ps. xli. 12)? See also on
lix. 2.——To trample my courts]
Like the oxen led in to sacrifice ;
so formal is your attendance.

13 False offerings] i.e., hypo-
critical sacrifices, contrasted with
‘right’ ones in Ps. iv. 5, li. 20.
Minkhah is here taken in its pri-
mary sense of ‘gift, as in Gen. iv.
3, 5, 1 Sam. ii. 17, Mal. i. 10; and
in the common phrase, ‘the even-
ing sacrifice.” Dr. Kay, with Ew.,
Del., &c., adopts the secondary
and more common sense of ‘meal-
offering.’ But why should the least
important kind of sacrifice be
singled out? After the mention of
the ‘courts, we expect at least an
implicit reference to bloody offer-
ings. The reason why so many
adopt the less natural rendering is
the supposed reference to incense
in the next clause (see Lev. ii. 2).
But the word they render ‘incense’
(#’toreth) means properly ‘a sweet
smoke,’ as in Ps. Ixvi. 15, ‘with the
sweet smoke of rams’ (see Hupfeld
[ad foc], Deut. xxxiii. 10 [where
parallel to ‘ whole burnt offerings ’]).
‘The new moon... convo-
cation] This corresponds to the
division in a much later book, ‘the

sabbaths, the new moons, and the
solemn feasts’ (2 Chr. viii. 13).
The calling or proclaiming of con-
vocation belonged properly to the
great festivals (Lev. xxill. 4), though,
apparently by an afterthought, to
give greater honour to the Sabbath,
the weekly festival also receives
the name of ‘convocation’ (ddd. v.
3). ‘Convocations’ form an integral
part of Isaiah’s sketch of a regene-
rated Zion (iv. 5). For the newmoon,
see Num. x. 10, xxvill. 11-16.
I cannot bear ...] Before he
has completed one construction, he
begins another ; he is carried away
by indignation. Such strictness in
ritual combined with such moral
laxity! (Utrumgue simul, as de
Dieu puts it.)

1) Many prayers] Forms of
prayer are nowhere directly or-
dained in the existing Pentateuch,
though patterns of prayer are given
for special occasions, Num. vi. 23-
26, Deut. xxvi. 5-10, 13-15. ‘The
men of the Great Assembly’ (i.e.,
the Scripturists who succeeded
Ezra) were the first to prescribe a
definite form of prayer (‘ Berachoth
f. 284, 29a’). Full of blood] i.e.,
guilty of judicial murders (comp.
v. 7). Perhaps, however, ‘blood-
shed’ may be put by synecdoche
for ‘violent conduct leading to the
ruin of others,’ the ‘soul’ or vital
principle being ‘in the blood.’ This
view may be supported by lix. 3,
Deut. xxxii. 40, Mic. iii. 10. Prov.

8 ISAIAH.

(CHAP. I.

‘7 learn to do well, seek out justice, righten the violent man,
do justice to the orphan, plead for the widow.

1 Come now, and let us bring our dispute to an end, saith
Jehovah. Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall become
white as snow; though they be red as crimson, they shall

become as wool.

If ye be willing and obey, the good of

the land shall ye eat; * but if ye be unwilling and defiant,
by the sword shall ye be eaten, for the mouth of Jehovah hath

spoken it.

i. 11. Comp. with caution Hupfeld
on Ps. ix. 13.

17 Righten| Bring into the right
way. In these verses we seem to
have an echo of the justice-loving
Amos (see chap. v.) who was sezor
to Isaiah._—Plead for the widow]
ie., let not the want of an advo-
cate (no uncommon thing in the
court of a modern kadee) prevent
you, the judges, from doing justice
to her.

18 Bet us bring our dispute to
anend] ‘ Let us reason together’
(A.V.) is a misleading translation ;
the Divine Judge in this passage
does not reason, but commands
amendment. Though .. .
white as snow] We must not ex-
plain this on the analogy of a
passage in a much later work, Ps.
li. 7. There, no doubt, a free and
unconditional pardon is attached
to an unreserved repentance and
humble trust in God’s mercy. But
the repentance required by Isaiah
is a trifle compared with that of
Ps. li. ; itis comparatively external,
and does but touch the surface of
the conscience. It is not spiritual
joy (as in Ps. li. 8, 12) which is
promised in Isaiah, but the enjoy-
ment of the fruits of the land.
This is guaranteed on condition
of a reformation in practice. The
promise in v. 18 is conditioned by
uv. 19a, just as the promises in
Iviii. 8, 9@ are conditioned by vv.
94, 10. There is a curious appli-
cation of this passage to the times
of the last good high priest, Simeon
the Just, in the Talmud ; see De-
renbourg, /fist. de la Palestine, p.

21 How hath become a harlot the faithful city, she

48. On the use of crimson-red for
‘dark,’ comp. Song of Sol. vii. 5,
and see Del.’s note here.

1020 The good of the land] All
outward blessings shall be yours,
Obs. the antithesis, ‘shall ye eat’
‘ ‘shall ye be eaten.’ The
sword is personified, as in xxxiv.
5) 6.

*1 How hath become... ] This
short, plaintive strain need not be
a verse of a current song (Roorda),
for lyricsnatches are not uncommon
in the Prophets, and the idea is that
of v. 7... Comp. for the form, Lam.
i. 1, It is the prophet who speaks,
in the manner of a Greek chorus,
to fill up the pause, while the by-
standers are anxiously waiting, but
waiting in vain, for Israel’s reply.
A harlot] Even heathen reli-
gions supposed a mysterious union
to exist between a god and his wor-
shippers (see on xliv. 11), symbol-
ised by the marriage relation. To
the heathen, however, this union
was a hereditary physical one; to
the Old Test. writers it was more
than this—a devotion of the heart
to Jehovah. Hence every moral
delinquency could be described as
adultery. It is in a moral sense
that Jerusalem is called ‘a harlot’
by Isaiah, as the context proves.
So in Ps, Ixxiii. 26, 27 (quoted by
Oehler), the pious man who says,
‘My heart’s rock and my portion
is God,’ is opposed to tibose whe
commit whoredom away from thee;’
and so our Lord calls the Scribes
and Pharisees an ‘ adulterous gener-
ation’ (Matt. xii. 39).——PFaithtul
city] i.e., faithful to her divine hus-

CUAP. 1.]

ISAIAH. 9

that was full of justice ; righteousness was wont to lodge in

her, but now assassins !

2 Thy silver is become dross, thy

choice drink thinned with water.. *? Thy law-makers are law-
breakers and in partnership with thieves ; every one loveth a

bribe, and pursueth rewards ;

to the orphans they do not

justice, and the cause of the widow cometh not unto them.

* Therefore—it is an oracle of the Lord, Jehovah Sabaoth,
the Hero of Israel: Ha! I will appease me through mine
adversaries, and avenge me on mine enemies, » and will
bring back my hand upon thee, smelting out as with lye
thy dross, and will take away all thy alloy; *and I will

band ; comp. Hos. ii.——To ledge]
i.e., to find a hospitable reception
(lit. to pass the night).—~—Assas-
sins] The word indicates that
they made murder an art or pro-
fession (so Hos. vi. 9).

22 phy silver . ‘ Silver
and ‘choice drink’ are figures for
the great men of Jerusalem, The
former occurs again in Jer. vi. 28,
30, Ezek. xxii. 18. The other side
of the figure is given in v. 25.

23 Paronomasia, as in Hos. ix. 15,
law-breakers| With reference to
the Torah, or (not so much ‘law’
as) directions given from time to
time by the prophets. Thieves]
i.e., the unjust rich who appeared
before their tribunal and bribed
them with a share of their plunder
(comp. iii. 13). Dr. Kay well com-
pares Ps. 1. 18. A bribe] Comp.
Mic. vii. 3 (an expansion of Isaiah’s
phrase).

24 Oracle] Etymologically, whis-
per; a phrase possibly mythic
in its origin (comp. on vili. 19), but
no doubt retained as an apt symbol
of the hidden action of the super-
natural. Comp. Job iv. 12-16.
Of the Lord . . . ] Such an accu-
mulation of Divine names is found
nowhere else in Isaiah (Del.). They
express the manifoldness of the
Divine power. The Hero of
Israel] ‘Hero, an uncommon
word in the Heb. (see crit. note),
only found in combination with
Israel (as here), and with Jacob, as
in xlix. 26, Ix. 16; also in the
original passage, Gen. xlix. 24, and

?

in Ps, cxxxii. 2, 5.——2 will ap-
pease myself] In the next clause
we have ‘avenge myself’ In fact,
the two verbs are almost the same
in pronunciation, and spring from
the same root, meaning ‘to fetch
one’s breath, ‘to give vent to a
strong emotion. The context
clearly shows that the relation of
God to man thus indicated is not,
in the sense of the prophet, occa-
sioned by caprice, but by the holi-
ness of the Divine nature (comp.
Ps, xviii. 26, 27). ‘The standpoint
of the inspired writers is a spiritual
realism, alike removed from both
spiritualism [in the philosophical
sense] and materialism’ (Mar-
tensen, Christian Ethics, p. 71).

75-27 With a few pen-strokes the
prophet sums up the spiritual fu-
ture of Israel. First of all, he cor-
rects the description in vv. 22, 23.
Bring back my hand upon
thee] The phrase is generally
used of punishment (Ps. Ixxxi. 14,
Amos i. 8); here, however, as in
Zech. xiii. 7, a favourable sense
predominates, though the Divine
favour was necessarily preceded by
the removal of the causes of indig-
nation. ‘Quod dicitur, reducam
manum meam ad te, si in te spectes,
vel ad castigantem vel ad sanan-
tem et beneficam manum referri
potest. Sed posterius hic obtinet,
quicquid alii reclament.’ Vitringa.
As with lye] or potash (Job ix.
30), which was used as a flux in
purifying metals.

*° as aforetime]

‘I remem-

Io ISAIAH.

[cHAP. 1

bring back thy judges as aforetime, and thy counsellors as at
the beginning: afterwards thou shalt be called, Citadel of

righteousness, Faithful city.

27 Zion shall be delivered

through justice, and her converts through righteousness.
28 But a demolition of rebels and sinners together ! and they

who forsake Jehovah shall perish.

2” For tye shall be

ashamed because of the terebinths which ye had pleasure in,
and blush for the gardens which ye chose: * yea, ye shall be
1 So Targ., 3 Heb. MSS.—Lo., Houb., &c.,—Text, they.

ber to thy good the kindness of
thy youth, the love of thy bridal
state, thy following of me in the
wilderness, in a land unsown’ (Jer.
ii. 2). The regeneration of Israel
is to be as great an event as its first
foundation on a religious basis by
Moses, Joshua, and Samuel. In
support of this explanation of the
phrase, see lii. 4, Jer. vil. 12,
Citadel of righteousness] Vi-
tringa and Naeg. see a connection
between this passage and the names
of Melchizedek (Gen. xiv. 18) and
Jehovah Tsidkenu (Jer. xxxiii. 15 ;
cf. xxiii. 6). But in both names
the righteousness spoken of has a
different shade of meaning from
the righteousness mentioned here.
The former is God’s righteousness,
His faithful adherence to his re-
vealed principles of action (Mel-
chisedek means ‘ King-righteous-
ness,’ the King being God); the
latter, the righteousness of man to
man, civil justice.

*7 Shall be delivered] A.V. ‘re-
deemed’; but this is not the pri-
mary meaning of the word ( padah)
and is often unsuitable ; comp. Job
vi. 23. The idea is that of cutting
loose. Through justice ...
through righteousness] This
may mean either the judicial mani-
festation of God’s righteousness (so
Del.), cf. v. 16, or the righteousness
of the people of Zion, especially of

‘their new judges (so the Rabbis,
followed by Ew., Hitz. Knob.).
The latter is favoured by the con-
text (see esp. v. 21), and is in har-
mony with Isaiah’s severe advocacy
of the moral law. Vitr. calls this

‘doctrina damnabilis superbiz,’ but
forgets Matt. v. 20.——Her con-
verts] Lit. her turning ones; i.e.,
the escaped remnant which shall
turn unto ‘ God-the-Mighty-One’
(x. 21), ‘when the Lord shall finish
his whole work upon mount Zion,
(x. 12). Isaiah’s first allusion to
this great doctrine. From v. 21
it is clear that the remnant, in the
mind of Isaiah, was to consist of
the poor and weak, who alone had
the germ of humility required by
the fear of Jehovah. A clearer
statement still in xxix. 19, 20.

28 The first clause, having no
verb, is to be taken as an exclama-
tion ; it is explained in the more
complete clause which follows.
Rebels] or renegades. Those
who have inwardly and outwardly
‘broken away from’ Jehovah (same
word v. 2). Sinners] Those
who lead a life of open sin.
Together] i.e., without exception.
Those who forsake Jehovah]
Those who in the one way or the
other have alienated themselves
from God.

*9 Ashamed] Not in the sense
of Rom. vi. 21; it is the disap-
pointingness of nature-worship
which is indicated. The gar-
dens] or, the groves. These are
hardly pleasure-gardens (Hitz.),
for there is a contrast between
‘ forsaking Jehovah’ and ‘choosing
the gardens.’ Groves were the
scenes of the worship of Ashérah,
the Canaanitish goddess of fer-
tility and good fortune (xvii. 8);
see lvii. 5, Ixvi. 17, 2 Kings xvi. 4 :
and comp. Juvenal, Saz. iii. 13, vi.

CHAP. 1] ISAIAH. Il

as a terebinth whose leaves are withered, and as a garden that
hath no water ; *!and the strong one shall become tow, and
his work a spark, and they shall both burn together, and none

quencheth.

545. Votive offerings may still be
seen hanging upon trees on the
east side of the Jordan (Peschel,
Volkerkunde, p. 201).

31 Phe strong one] The mighty
and rich (the word will cover both
meanings) will refuse conversion,

work] i.e., his idol, cf. xli. 29, Ivii.
12 (synonymous word). Or, his
gains (Caspari). The meaning is,
his sin contains the germ of his
ruin: ‘per quod quis peccat, per
idem punitur et ipse.” See further
on wv. 18,

and suffer destruction. His

APPENDIX ON ‘JEHOVAH SABAOTH?

TuHIs remarkable but obscure phrase, expressive of the almightiness
of God and His distinctness from nature, occurs forty-nine times in the
acknowledged prophecies of Isaiah, and only thirteen times (including
xxi, Io) in those of questioned authorship.

i. As to its meaning.—(a). The theory which has met with the widest
acceptance till recently, is that of Ewald,! who regards the ‘hosts’ a3
primarily the angels. According to him, the phrase arose on the occasion
of some great victory, when it seemed as if the armies of Jehovah had
come down to the relief of His people. He finds an allusion to this
origin in Isa. xxxi. 4, and even, which seems more venturesome, in Judges
v.20. The rise of the name is traced to the close of the period of the
Judges (it occurs first in 1 Sam. i. 3, 11), on the ground of its evident
popularity in the time of David ; Ewald refers especially to Ps. xxiv. 7-10
(the only Psalm-passage in which the phrase occurs outside the Korahite
psalms), which he regards as occasioned by the solemn entrance of the
ark into the city of David. He admits, however (referring to Isa. xl.
26) that the phrase was in later times probably explained of the stars.
The wsus loguendi is to some extent undoubtedly in favour of this view.
The angels are called ‘Jehovah’s hosts’ in Ps. ciii. 21, cxlviii. 2 (see
below), ‘the host of heaven’ in 1 Kings xxii. 19, Neh. ix. 6, and (a certain
number of them) ‘a camp of Elohim,’ Gen. xxxii. 2; and in Isa. vi. 3
there may be an allusion to this meaning of ‘Jehovah Sabdoth.’ There
is no doubt a large element of truth in this view of Ewald’s.

(6) Herder and Schrader? think the ‘hosts’ were originally the armies
of Israel, of whom Jehovah is represented as being the leader, Ex. vii.
4, xii. 41, 51; comp. Josh. v.14. The explanation in a speech of David,
1 Sam. xvii. 45, is favourable to this view, as also is the fact that ninay

1 Ewald, Hist. of Israel, iii. 62, Germ. ed. iii. 87; Die Lehre der Bibel von Gott,

ii, 1, Pp. 339. 340. ae i

Herder, Vom Geist der Ebrdischen Poesie, ii. 84, 85; Schrader, Fahrd. fir

protestant. Theologie, 1875, pp. 316-320; comp. Delitzsch, Luther. Zeitschrift, 1874,
p. 217, &c., and note on Ps, xxiv. 10.

12 ISAIAH. [cHAP. I.

everywhere else means ‘earthly armies.’ ‘Lord of Armies’ will then be
the best translation ; so already Aquila, Symm., Theod., Vulg. Herder
grants, however, that the meaning gradually expanded till it included first
the stars, and then the whole fulness of the Divine glory in creation
(comp. use of Na¥ in Gen. ii. 1). Schrader further remarks, that the
celestial hosts of Jehovah are constantly expressed by S2¥ (sing.); in
two places only, Ps. ciii. 21, cxlviii. 2, we find yw2y¥ and way ; but these
readings, Schrader thinks, are due to a pedantic grammatical objection,
the authors of the points having taken offence at the incongruity of a
singular noun with a plural verb. In both places we should read nay,

which indeed is the K’ri reading in Ps. cxlviii. z. Tothis remark Delitzsch
replies, Why should not Nay have two plurals, just as ‘y has both
D’Na¥ and niway? The received reading in the Psalms should stand.
I cannot, any more than Delitzsch, accept Schrader’s explanation as
adequate, even admitting his view of the meaning of ‘y. It is clear to
me from Isa. xiii. 4 that the prophets sometimes interpreted the word
with reference to non-Israelitish armies, when those were under com-
mission, so to speak, from Jehovah. But even thus we have not expanded
the meaning sufficiently.

(c) The original meaning of ‘ Sabdoth,’ as critics are more and more
coming to see, is probably the stars. So Kuenen, Tiele, Baudissin, and
even Delitzsch.! Whence comes it, asks the latter, that the title Jehovah
Sabdoth comes specially before us in the regal period? There were
armies of Israel before this ; must there not be some connection with
the astrolatry of the neighbouring nations (especially the Aramzeans)
with whom the Israelites then came into contact? The stars, too, are
constantly referred to as ‘the host of heaven’ (Deut. iv. 19, xvii. 3, 2 Kings
xvii. 16, xxi. 3, 5, xxiii. 4, 5, Isa. xxxiv. 4, Jer. viii. 2, xix. 13, Xxxili. 22,
Zeph. i. 5, Dan. viii. 10, 2 Chron. xxxiil. 3, 5); in Job xxv. 3 (comp. 5) as
Jehovah’s ‘bands’; and in Isa. xl. 26 as the ‘host’ which He musters.
Considering that the roots of Mosaism lay in a popular, primitive Semitic
religion (though its life-giving spirit came from another source) ; or,
in other words, that the prophets did not introduce an entirely new
phraseology corresponding to their new ideas, it seems most probable
that when the stars were first called the hosts of God it was with the
notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in
the angels threw the belief in the stars as animated beings into the back-
ground ; the angels, however, were evidently connected very closely with
the stars, as appears from Job xxv. 5 (comp. iv. 18), and especially
xxxvill. 7. Comp. also Judges v. 20, Dan. viii. 10, 11, and the sym'olic
language of Luke x. 18, Rev. xii. 7; notice too the place of the stars
between vegetables and animals in Gen. i. 16. Our own Marlowe has a
phrase pointing to a similar idea :

(The moon, the planets, and the metcors light,)

These anges in their crystal armour fight
A doubtful battle, &c.—(Tamburlsine, Act V., Se. 2),

1 Tt is strange that Hermann Schultz, in ed. 2 of his valuable A lélestamen cliche
Theologte (1878, p. 492), should still adhere to the opposite view.

CHAP. 1.] ISAIAH. 13

and Wordsworth, in his sonnet on the stars, indulges in the same fanciful
supposition.—It is only of the original meaning of the phrase that I am
now speaking. In later times different writers may have used it in other
senses, some thinking of the angels, others of the armies of Israel, others
in all senses combined ; hence LXX.’s mavroxpdrwp, in 2 Sam., 1 Chron.,
Minor Prophets, and eight times in Jeremiah (according to Gesenius).
For the latter use, comp. the parallel phrase about Nebo quoted below.

ii. Parallel religious phrases—The Assyrian and Babylonian paral-
lels are not verbally so close as might be supposed from the translations
sometimes given, as 27ssatu, plur. k7ss@éz, is not exactly a ‘legion’ (Oppert,
Lenormant) in a military sense, but ‘a multitude, or mass of men’ (Aram.
Runash, collegit). Still they agree in ascribing to the supreme gods the
lordship over the celestial as well as the earthly populations. Assur, for
instance, is called ‘ the king of the multitudes of the great gods’ (Odelisk
of Nimriid, line i.) ; Nebo, ‘the king of the multitudes of heaven and
earth’ (‘Annals of Sargon,’ Records of Past, vii. 46, amending the trans-
lation) ; while to Marduk, the other great Babylonian deity, is ascribed
the empire of ‘the spirits of the multitudes of heaven and earth”! The
phrase ‘spirits of heaven’ will include the three hundred spirits, who,
though not gods properly so called, were supernatural beings, and were
closely attached to the stars (a similar theory to that noticed above).?
On the parallel Persian belief in the Fravashis, see Spiegel, Zvanzsche
Alterthitmer, ii. 94.

iii. Construction. There are three views, (a) that of Gesenius: ‘y is
in the direct relation of a genitive to ‘n, comp. Aram-Naharaim, ‘ Aram of

Hosts’ (this is confirmed by the occurrence of ’y min» and ’y sabe many in
the same book—Jeremiah) , (c) ’y has become a proper name, as it was
evidently taken by the author or corrector of Ps. Ixxx. 8, 15 ’¥ obs, by
the translators of parts of the Sept. version (kupios ZaBawé constantly in
Isaiah), by St. Jerome once (Jer. xi. 20, Vulg.), and Luther constantly,
and as in the Szdy/ine Oracles, and sometimes in (Christian) Ethiopic.
Comp. also Rom. ix. 29 (quotation from Isa. i. 9), James v. 4. ‘It is at
least a noteworthy coincidence,’ remarks Dr. Plumptre, ‘that it is
through the liturgy which is ascribed to [St. James], that it has passed
into the devotional language of Christendom’ (Szblical Studies, p. 15).
An incidental confirmation of the view of which we are speaking is
furnished by Valerius Maximus, who, being a mere compiler, doubtless
took his statement from a much older authority. He relates that a
preetor expelled certain Jews from Rome, ‘ qui Sabazii Jovis cultu Romanos
inficere mores conati erant’ (i. 3, 3). It is difficult to avoid seeing here
a confusion of the Phrygian deity Sabazius with the Sabdoth of the Jews.
If we are puzzled to account for Sabdoth as a proper name, Luzzatto is
at hand with an answer (note on Isa. i. 9); he accounts for it in the same
way as for the use of Elohim for the true God, the separate objects of

1 Sahrb. fiir protestant. Theologie, 1875, p. 349; Lenormant, La Magie, p. 176 ;

Boscawen, 7.S./3.4. 1877, p. 299.
2 Comp. Tylor, Primztive Culture, i. 263.

14 ISATATI, [CHAP. II.

heathen worship, so far as they had a real existence, being concentrated
in Jehovah. The combination of two proper names is paralleled in the
Corpus Inscr. Semtt. (i. 33) by the Astar-Kemosh of the Moabite Stone
(l. 17), though the parallel is incomplete, as there is no evidence that
Sabd4oth was ever used without another name for God being prefixed.
At the very least, Sabdoth is in process of becoming a proper name, and
there is good ancient authority for the rendering here adopted, Jehovah
Sabdoth,

CHAPTER II.

THERE is clearly no connection between chaps. i. and ii., whereas ii.-iv.
form a continuous prophecy. There is a difference between Ewald and
Delitzsch as to whether chap. v. ought to be regarded as part of the same
work as chaps. ii.-iv. The moral and social state described agrees with
that in the foregoing chapters, but the prediction of the judgment differs
by introducing human instruments, viz. the Assyrians. Ewald’s conclusion,
that ‘these pieces belong to one great oration’ (Prophets, ii. 18), seems to
me correct, provided it be clearly understood that chaps. ii.-iv. represent,
at any rate in part, earlier discourses than chap. v. I have given a full
analysis in 7.C. A, pp. 3, 4. Suffice it to say here, that the burden of the
prophecy is the necessity of a grand vindication of God’s holiness, which
will lead to a realisation of Israel’s destiny such as is at present impossible.

As to the date of these four chapters. Two points referred to by the
prophet are of importance, (1) the taste for foreign fashions, particularly
in religion ; and (2) the weak character of the king. Both suggest the
reign of Ahaz, who was specially fickle in religion (2 Kings xvi. 2-4, 10),
whereas Uzziah and Jotham were strict worshippers of Jehovah, and who,
according to vii. 1-12, was both timid and a prey to ignoble superstitions.
But what part of the reign of Ahaz? From ii. 16 (‘ships of Tarshish’) it
appears that Elath was stillin the possession of Judah. Now this port was
lost by Ahaz during the period of the Syro-Israelitish invasion. Hence the
prophecies summed up in chaps. ii.-iv., or ii.—v,, must be placed either very
early indeed in the reign of Ahaz, or else the prophecies of two successive
periods (Jotham and Ahaz) have been fused together. See also on ix. 8-x. 4.

'The word which Isaiah, son of Amoz, saw concerning
Judah and Jerusalem, ?‘And it shall come to pass in the

1 The heading evidently belongs
to chaps. ii.—iv., or ii-v., which are
thought to have formed a separate
collection of prophecies. The
word] ic, the revelation (so
Jer. xviii. 18). There cannot be
any special reference to the actual
words of the prophecy, for it is
added, ‘which Isaiah saw’ (see on
i. 1).

Da This passage occurs with a

few variations and one additional
verse in Mic, iv. 1-4. The varia-
tions have a more rugged look,
and therefore are perhaps closer to
the original text, and certainly the
verses fit in better there with the
context than in Isaiah. Micah
therefore can hardly have borrowed
it from Isaiah. Neither can Isaiah
have borrowed it from Micah, for
the prophecy to which it is attached

CHAP. II.]

ISAIAH. 15

after-days that the mountain of Jehovah’s house shall become

(see Mic. iii.) was delivered in the
time of Hezekiah (Jer. xxvi. 18).
The force of this argument has
been doubted by Del., who observes
that Micah may have composed
the prophecy long before he pub-
lished it in Hezekiah’s reign, and
that Isaiah may have taken the
passage from Micah’s lips, though
not from his book. (Similarly Cas-
pari, Micha, p. 447; but see, on
the other side, Kuenen, Onderzoek,
ii. 348.)—It is a minute and delicate
question. My zmpression is that
Mic. iv. I-4 is not in the tone of
Micah, and that v. 5 is a skilful
attempt of that prophet to work a
fragment of an older prophecy into
his own work :—Isa. ii. 5 has no
doubt a similar object. Both Isaiah
and Micah were charged with mes-
sages of a predominantly gloomy
character. Their hearers, how-
ever, were familiar wiih an old and
truly Divine word of promise, which
seemed to some inconsistent with
the terrible judgment which later
prophets so earnestly announced.
Isaiah and Micah, prophets of a
kindred spirit, have both quoted
this prophecy with the view of
showing its essential agreement
with their own graver revelation.
Similar quotations from older works
occur (probably) in Isa. xv., xvi.,
Jer. xlix. 7-22.—It is significant
that Isaiah leaves out one verse
of the fragment which Micah pre-
serves. Such an idyllic picture was
out of harmony with the awful
prospect before Isaiah (Duhm).

2 And it shall come to pass]
These words nowhere else occur at
the beginning of a prophecy.
In the after-days] Literally, in
the sequel of the days. A much-
debated phrase, which occurs here
only in Isaiah, but four times in the
Book of Jeremiah (xxili. 20, xxx.
24, xlviil. 47, xlix. 39), once in
Hosea (iii. 5), once in Micah (iv. 1
= Isa. ii, 2), once in Ezekiel
(xxxvili. 16), once in Daniel (x. 14),
and four times in the Pentateuch

(Gen. xlix. 1, Num. xxiv. 14, Deut.
iv. 30, xxxi. 29); in Ezek. xxxviii.
8, we have the parallel phrase ‘in
the sequel of the years.’ The ren-
dering adopted above is based on
philological grounds. ‘After,’ in
the term ‘after-days,’ corresponds
toa Hebrew word (ak/’7ith), mean-
ing—not ‘end, but—‘ latter part’
or ‘sequel, as Bildad says in
the Book of Job, ‘ Thy early time
was a trifle, but thy latter time
(thy future) shall be very great’
(vill. 7). Precisely the same phrase
occurs in Assyrian, and its meaning
is certain from the context (awa
akhrat yumi irtd, ‘for a future time
I deposited.’) In the Old Test. the
phrase ‘in the sequel of the days,’
or ‘ in the afier-days,’ occurs only
in prophecies—mostly (not always,
as Kimchi asscrts), referring to the
glorious Messianic period which
should ensue upon the ‘day’ or
assize ‘of Jehovah,’ and so here, but
sometimes used quite vaguely of
future time, e.g. Jer. xxiii. 20, ‘The
anger of Jehovah shall not turn
back, till he have executed, and till
he have carried into effect the pur-
poses of his heart : in future days
ye shall duly consider it’ (Hender-
son’s translation) ; also Deut. iv.
30, xxxi. 29, where a reference to
the Messianic period is excluded
by the context. The rendering of
A.V. ‘the last days’ is misleading,
for the Messianic period (described
in the following verses) has no
‘last days’; it is without an end
(ix. 7). A similar mistake occurs
in the A,V. of 1 Tim. iv. 1, where
év vaTepos Katpois ‘in later times’
(Revised Version), is rendered ‘in
the lattertimes.’ The mountain
of Jehovah's house....]| An
implied contrast to Sinai, whence
the earlier and more limited reve-
lation proceeded. Mount Zion,
where Jehovah’s merciful presence
constantly abides, is to be the
centre of religious unity to the
world. So much is_ intelligible
enough, but the physical pheno-

16 ISAIAII.

(CHAP. II.

fixed at the head of the mountains, and be exalted above the

hills, and all the nations shall stream unto it.

’ And many

peoples shall set forth and shall say, “Come, let us go up to
the mountain of Jehovah, to the house of the God of Jacob,
and let him teach us out of his ways, and we will walk in his

paths.”

word of Jehovah from Jerusalem.

For from Zion shall go forth the instruction, and the

4 And he shall judge be-

tween the nations, and arbitrate for many peoples : and they
shall beat their swords into coulters, and their spears into
pruning- knives, nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
neither shall they learn war any more.’

menon connected with this state-
ment seems paradoxical ; and Vi-
tringa asks,‘ Quid sibi velit, et
quod sub cortice lateat myste-
rium?’ But the prophet means
just what he says. It is for the
spirit of revelation at each succes-
sive stage of prophecy to strip off
the worn-out form received from
the past, until the fulfilment shows
the depth of spiritual meaning un-
derneath the letter. It was an old
belief in Eastern Asia that there
was a mountain reaching from
earth to heaven, on the summit of
which was the dwelling of the
gods (see on xiv. 13). The prophet
is, perhaps, alluding to this belief,
which he recognises as true in
substance, though attached by the
heathen toa wrong locality. At any
rate, mount Zion is to be physically
raised, and to become fixed at
the head of the lower mountains,
which radiate, as it were, in all
directions from it. A similar phy-
sical change is anticipated for J eru-
salem in Zech. xiv. 10, and for
the Valley of Jehoshaphat, in con-
nection with the ‘ day of Jehovah,’
in Joel iii. 12. Ezekiel, too, speaks
of having been transported in an
ecstatic state to ‘a very high moun-
tain’ (xl. 2), evidently alluding to
this passage. The view adopted
has the further method of explain-
ing a similar phrase in xi. 9 (see
note). The alternative rendering,
‘on the top of the (piled up) moun-
tains’ (Vitr., Ew., Luz., Caspari),
requires to be taken in a figura-

tive sense, and so introduces an
inconsistency into the description.
And all the nations... ]
This great mountain shall become
their rallying-point, like the ban-
ner in x1. 10. Parallel passages,
Isa. Ix. 3, Jer. iii. 17, Zech. ii. 11,
viii. 22, 23.

5 Shall say, Come. . ] Simi-
larly Zech. viii. 20, 21. Let
him teach us] viz. by his pro-
phets (called ‘teachers,’ xxx. 20).
The revelation of the ‘ prophet-
people,’ Israel, was reserved for II
Isaiah. Out of his ways] God’s
ways here are not His dealings
with man (as lv. 8), but the rules
of moral and religious conduct. So
7 odes is used in the New Test. for
Christianity viewed on its practical
side, and sadi/ ‘ way’ in the Koran.
These rules are described as a store
out of which the divine teacher
draws his instruction (comp. Ps.
xciv, 12 Del.). Shall go forth
the instruction] i.e., the revela-
tion of divine truth shall be like a
perennial stream.

4 Thus Israelites and non-
Israelites shall be united in one
great spiritual empire under Je-
hovah. No satraps nor Tartans
are necessary, for the nations have
the full rights of citizenship (Ps.
Ixxxvii.), and the only precedenc?
of Israel is that coveted by Milton
for England, of ‘teaching the na-
tions how to live.’ —-They shall
beat their swords. . , The
same image reversed Joel ii. (iv.)
10. Comp. also ix. 5 (4), Hos. ii.

CHAP. I1.]

ISATAH.

17

5O house of Jacob! come, let us walk in the light of

Jehovah.

6 For thou hast cast off thy people, the house of

Jacob, because they are replenished * from the East,* and are
diviners of the clouds like the Philistines, and make con-

tracts with the sons of aliens.

7 And his land is become full

® With sorcery, Sept., Ew. (var. read.).

18, Zech. ix. 10, ‘the battle-bow
shall be cut off; and he shall speak
peace unto the nations.’

5 But alas! the ideal time de-
scribed by the prophet is still very
far off. Israel himself must first be
brought into the right way. There-
fore, in accents of an appealing
tenderness rare with Isaiah, he ex-
claims, O house of Jacob! come,
let us walk (comp. ‘ Come, let us
go up, v. 3), im the light of
Jehovah, ie. in the light of
Jehovah’s revelation. ‘Thy word
is a lamp unto my feet, and a
light unto my path’ (Ps. cxix.
105).

6 The connection is a little diffi-
cult to trace, and it is very possible
that the text is in some disorder.
As the text stands, we had best ex-
plain it thus, The invitation in
v. 5 implies that the people were at
present not ‘ walking in the light of
Jehovah’; in fact, that they had
more or less completely forsaken
Jehovah.! But instead of con-
tinuing, ‘For thou hast forsaken
thy God, O house of Jacob,’ the
prophet expresses the correspond-
ing fact from the point of view of
revelation : For thou (O Jehovah !)
hast cast off thy people, and then
the cause of this change in the
Divine revelation, because they
are replenished from the East.
(‘House of Jacob !’ in v. 6 @ is re-
peated to link this section with the
last.) The East here undoubtedly
means Aram (i.e., Syria and Meso-
potamia), which in ix. 12 (comp.
xi. 14) is antithetically parallel to
Philistia, and in Num. xxiii. 7, pa-
rallel synonymously to ‘ the moun-

tains of the East.’ All forms of
culture, especially religious, are
covered by Isaiah’s phrase. The
prevalence of magic in Syria is
shown by the narrative of Balaam
(Num. xxii.-xxiv.), and the Aramaic
affinities of three of the special
names for sorcerers in ili. 2, 3 con-
firm the accuracy of the prophet’s
statement. Babylonia, however,
not Syria, was the earliest home of
magic. The very next phrase,
diviners of the _ clouds, re-
minds us that the clouds, both of
the day and of the night, were
studied by the Chaldean diviners.?
Another possible rendering is
cloud-makers (Del.), which re-
minds us of the common name of
sorcerers in savage tribes, ‘rain-
makers.’——Like the Philistines]
With whom the victories of Uzziah
and Jotham had brought them into
contact. They had a recognised
order of diviners (1 Sam. vi. 2), and
a famous oracle at Ekron (2 Kings
i. 2).——-Make contracts with
... ] Alluding probably (if the
rendering be correct) to the com-
mercial activity of the reigns of
Uzziah and Jotham (2 Kings xiv.
22, xvi. 6). The prophets were op-
posed to this, because it opened the
door to influences unfavourable
to a pure religion. See xxiii. 17,
Zeph.i. 8.

7 Is become full of silver and
gold ... ] Comp. the account of
Hezekiah’s tribute to Sennacherib
on the Taylor cylinder : — ‘30
talents of gold, 800 talents of sil-
ver, cast metal (?), large
precious stones,” &c., (Schrader,
K. A. T. p. 293.

1 On the relative proportion of heathenish elements in the popular religion of N.
and S., see Robertson Smith, Zhe Prophets of Is: ael, pp. 200-203.
2 Lenormant, La divination chez les Chaldéens, pp. 63-64.

VOL. IL.

Cc

18 ISAIAH.

[CHAP. II.

of silver and gold, and without end are his treasures ; * and
his land is become full of horses, and without end are his
chariots; 2and his land is become full of not-gods; to the
work of their hands they do homage, to that which their

fingers have made.

10’ Therefore must the earth-born be

bowed down, and the man be brought low,” and thou canst
not forgive them. Go into the rock, and hide thee in the

b And the manis Xc., Ew.

8 frorses . . . chariots] The
chariots were not merely for use
in war, but for state ; comp. 2 Sam.
xv. 1; 2 Kings v.9 153; Eccles. x.
7 (Hitz). Horses were first im-
ported from Egypt by the worldly-
wise Solomon (1 Kings iv. 26, x.
28, 29); and Ahab seems to have
cared more for them than for his
suffering people (1 Kings xviii. 5).
The prohibition in Deut. xvit. 16
was therefore not uncalled for, and
it was no idle feature in the de-
scription of the Messianic King,
that he was to ride upon an ass
(Zech. ix.9). The statement about
the chariots must be taken with
the qualifications required by
xxx. I, xxxvi. 8. Ritter thinks that
chariots were mostly used in
Ephraim, and_ horses without
chariots in Judah (as being more
hilly) ; comp. Zech. ix. Io.

® wrot-gods] i.e., idols, possibly
including symbols of Jehovah.
Similar complaints are made by
Isaiah’s contemporaries, Amos (ii.
4), Hosea (xi. 12), and Micah (i. 5,
v. 13). The uniqueness of the
divinity of Jehovah, and the in-
adequacy of any symbol, were their
special revelation. Isaiah seems
to have chosen or coined a special
word (el¢é/tm) for the dethroned
idol-gods; as if he would say,
They are not ¢éfm ‘strong ones’
= gods, but ’e/¢/¢m ‘ nonentities.’

10 wherefore must...] Bya
necessity of God’s moral law (this
is implied in the Hebrew, comp.
Ps. cix. 16-18), such open infidelity
must be chastised. Whether the
chastisement is past, present, or
future is not expressed in the words

themselves ; it is the context which
proves it to be future (comp. v 15).
Many ot the older expositors, how-
ever,and among the moderns Ewald,
take the ‘bowing down’ and the
‘bringing low’ to refer to the 1:dola-
ters of the preceding verse (‘ Thus
the earth-born abaseth himself, and
the man boweth low’), the transition
to the judgment being formed by the
second half of the verse (‘ And for-
give them not’). The objection is
(1) that the idolatrous worship has
been sufficiently treated in v. 9, and
(2) that there is no evidence that
v. 9 6 marks a transition—in order
to do so, it should run ‘And thou
—forgive them not’ (Naeg.).
The earth-born] There is prob-
ably an allusion to a popular ety-
mology for adam ‘man’ (comp.
Ps. cxlvi. 3, 4), as a Latin writer
might take homo from humus.
And thou canst not forgive
them.] Lit., and forgive them
not. Why? Because theirs is a
“sin unto death’ (comp. xxii. 14).
‘Forgive me my foul murder?
That cannot be’ (Hamlet, act iii.
SC. 3).

A brief pause must be sup-
posed here, after which the divine
Judge is seen approaching, accom-
panied by the earthquake and the
storm (v. 25; comp. Mic.i 4, Hab.
iii.) Obs. nothing is said as yet
of the Assyrians.— Go into the
rock] Similarly Hosea x. 8, Rev.
vi. 16. The limestone caverns of
Palestine were frequently used as
strongholds and_hiding-places,
Judges vi. 2, xv. 8,1 Sam. xiii. 6,
xiv. II, xxiv. 3 (especially), 1 Kings
xviii, 13,

CHAP. 11.] ISAIAII. 19

dust from before the terror of Jehovah and from his excellent
majesty. '™The haughty eyes of the earth-born must be
brought low, and the loftiness of men bowed down, and
Jehovah alone be exalted in that day.

For a day hath Jehovah Sabdoth upon all that is
proud and lofty, and upon all that is raised up that it may
be brought low; "and upon all cedars of Lebanon that
are lofty and raised up, and upon all the oaks of Bashan;
“and upon all the lofty mountains, and upon all the up-
raised hills; and upon every high tower, and upon every
fortified wall ; and upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon

1 Alone shall be exalted]
‘Alone shall stand a high and safe
asylum (as the word means); like
animpregnable rock-fortress (comp.
Ps. xlvi. 7, 11)’ Dr. Kay.

1 For a day hath...] ‘A
day’ for displaying his power in
wrath and in mercy (see on xiii. 6),
hence followed by ‘upon. ‘Hath
it,’ viz. in readiness—every day has
a kind of pre-existence in the super-
sensible world (Job iii. 1-10). Itis
the world’s judgment-day which is
here referred to, one act of which
is the judgment upon Jerusalem,
see on chap. xxiv. The same form
of phrase in xxii. 5, xxxiv. 8.—
Proud and lofty] The ideas of
eminence, pride, and opposition to
Jehovah melt into each other in
the Old Test. ; comp. Job xl. 11,
12, Gen. ili. 22.

13 ypon all cedars of Lebanon

..] It has been asked whether
the various items of the following
description are to be taken literally
or figuratively. They must be all
taken in the same way; there is
nothing to indicate a distinction
(made by Calvin and Hitzig) be-
tween vv. 13, 14, and the rest of
the passage. The mention of arti-
ficial as well as natural objects
pleads strongly in favour of a lite-
ral interpretation; only we must
not suppose the judgment of Jeho-
vah to be confined to the objects
here specified. We have before
us nothing less than the germ of
the prophecy of the ‘regeneration’
of nature (Matt. xix. 28), which,

though probably affected in some
of its Jewish and Judzo-Chris-
tian expressions by the analogous
Persian belief, is in idea an essen-
tial part of the old prophetic
teaching. Actual nature has be-
come too closely wedded to man’s
sinful pride to be suitable for the
regenerate people of the glorified
theocracy. The forests of Lebanon
and Bashan tempted Solomon and
Uzziah to build those palaces and
towers which corrupted the sim-
plicity of Israelitish faith. They
are therefore to be taken as re-
presentatives of the condemned
features of the existing order of
things, just as towers are taken
in xxx. 23.

4 Mountains. . . hills] Comp.
Koran, Sur. xx. 105-6 (Rodwell),
‘and they will ask thee of the moun-
tains : Say : scattering my Lord will
scatter them in dust ; And he will
leave them a level plain: thou shalt
see in it no hollows or jutting hills.’
Mohammed is speaking of the Day
of Resurrection.

15 wigh tower] Referring tothe
buildings of Uzziah and Jotham,
2 Chron. xxvi. 9, 10, xxvii. 3, 4.
Comp. Hosea viii. 14, Mic. v. 11.

16 Ships of Tarshish|] Deep
sea ships, such as were built for
the foreign trade, especially with
Tartessus and Ophir (1 Kings xxii.
48). At this time, then, the Jews
still possessed a fleet, the station
of which was at Elath, on the Red
Sea. In the reign of Ahaz the
Arameans ‘recovered Elath for

c2

20 ISAIAH. [CHAP. II.

all delightful works of imagery ; 7 and the highness of the
earth-born shall be bowed down, and the loftiness of men
brought low, and Jehovah alone shall be exalted in that
day. 'And the not-gods—the whole shall pass away. 'And
men shall go into caverns of rocks and holes of the ground,
from before the terror of Jehovah and from his excellent
majesty, when he shall arise to shock the earth. *In that
day shall a man cast his not-gods of silver and his not-gods
of gold, which were made for him to worship, to the moles
and to the bats, *!in order to go into the clefts of the rocks,
and into the rents of the crags, from before the terror of
Jehovah and from his excellent majesty, when he shall arise

to shock the earth.

22¢Q cease ye from man, in whose nostrils is a breath ;
for at how much is he to be valued ?¢

© Omitted in Sept., and (as late marginal note) by Diestel and Studer.

Edom’ (2 Kings xvi. 6 Q. P. B,
compare xiv. 22). Precious
works of imagery] Such as the
merchant-ships brought from far
countries to furnish the houses of
the great. See crit. note.

18 and the not-gods...] A
verse of three words in the Hebrew,
suggestive of a swift and sudden
catastrophe.

19 Yo shock the earth] A tho-
roughly Isaianic paronomasia— ut
terreat terram.’ So in Ps. x. 18.

*0 Shalla man cast... .] Or,
shall (the whole tribe of them) cast
(Dr. Weir). Like an African fetish-
worshipper, disappointed of some
desired good. It is remarkable
that neither here nor in the partly
parallel passages, xxx. 22, xxxi. 7,
does Isaiah say anything against
the high places or local sanctuaries ;
it is only idolatry against which he
thunders. Nor, in fact, do Amos,
Hosea, or Micah—at least so far as
Judah is concerned. In Mic. i. 5
we should certainly, I think, read

not ‘high places’ but ‘sin, see
Q. P. B.; ‘high places’ is a gloss
from Hosea x. 8. ‘Which were
made] viz. for a very different pur-
pose. Lit. ‘which they made,’ viz.
the manufacturers of idols.

* In whose nostrils is a breath]
‘Jehovah Elohim .. . breathed
into his nostrils breath of life’
(Gen. il. 7). This verse connects
very badly with what precedes.
‘Cease ye from idols’ would be a
much more natural exhortation.
The style, too, is very inferior. Omit
the verse, and the effect of the se-
quel is enhanced. We then have a
striking transition from the general
description of the effects of the day
of Jehovah to the special details
connected with Jerusalem : the cap-
tivity of Jerusalem becomes the
earnest of the overthrow of all
‘proud and lofty’ things. The
tone of v. 22 reminds us of the
post-exile period. Comp. Ps. exlvi.
3, 4 (in a Psalm of Haggai and
Zechariah, according to Sept.).

CHAP. 111] ISAIAH. 21

CHAPTER III.

HAVING established the certainty of a judgment, the prophet goes on to
describe it in detail. Probably we have here a summary of a fresh series
of discourses. At v. 16 it is probable that the summary becomes a little
fragmentary, for the introductory formula is elsewhere confined to cases
in which Jehovah in person is the speaker. This is not the case here.
The unusually lax application of the formula suggests that here, as in
chap ii., a later editor has been at work, and that the formula is merely
inserted to bridge over a lacuna in the notes. Still the position of iii.
16-24 is not at all unsuitable. There are clearly points of contact in it
with what precedes. Haughtiness and luxury are rebuked in chap. ii,
and the prominence given to the women is in harmony with the feminine
form of the word ‘staff’ (see on v. 1), and with the statement respecting
the women in v. 12,—At v. 25 there is an abrupt transition from the fate
of the women to that of Zion as a whole.

‘For behold, the Lord, Jehovah Sabdoth, taketh away
from Jerusalem and from Judah stay and staff, *[every stay
of bread, and every stay of water]*; ?hero and warrior, judge

® Omitted as gloss by Hitz. and Knobel.

1 For behold, the Lord
Notice the solemnity of the intro-
duction. Comp. i. 24, x. 16, 33,
xix. 4. Removeth ... ie.,
mediately, through war and cap-
tivity. Stay and staff] i.e., all
those classes and orders mentioned
in vv. 2, 3, on which the outward
and inward life of the community
depends (ch. xix. 10; ‘the pillars’
=the nobles). ‘ Staff’ in the Heb.
is the feminine form of ‘stay’ (cf.
Mic. ii. 4, Nah. il, 11, Del.). Ob-
serve the importance still enjoyed
by women among the Israelites,
though less now than in the ‘ patri-
archal’ period. Every stay of
bread... ] It would be strange
if the prophet used the same
phrases in parallel members of the
verse in totally different senses. If
the classes referred to in vv. 2, 3
were merely those of bread-win-
ners, the productive classes as we
call them, the second interpretation
might perhaps pass. But with the
exception probably of the last but
one, it is not bread-winning but
valour and wisdom which charac-
terise these classes. It is probably
one of those marginal glosses which

the scribes and editors of the pro-
phecies inserted during or after
the exile (see any critical edition
of Jeremiah). Inattentive to the
context, a scribe interpreted ‘ stay
and staff’ by the light of the
phrases, ‘staff of bread’ (Ps. cv.
16, Ezek. iv. 16, v. 16, Lev. xxvi.
26), and ‘to stay the heart with
bread’ (Gen. xviii. 5, Ps. civ. 15).

2 First in order among the props
of the state came the warriors. The
prophet puts himself at the popular
or unbelieving point of view. Then
comes a medley of different offices.
Obs., in the mention of the e/der,
how the idea of the family still
governs the social organisation.
The ‘elders’ were originally heads
of families, and have their analogue
in the council of the Aryan village
communities (comp. Sir H. Maine).
References to their parliamentary
status (if the phrase may be used)
occur in Ex, iii. 16, 2 Sam. xix. 11,
1 Kings viii. 1, xx. 7. The institu-
tution lingered on during and after
the Babylonian exile, Jer. xxix. I,
Exek. xiv. 1, xx. 1, Ezra v. 5, vi.
7,x. 14; Matt. xxvi. 3, 47, Mark
xiv. 43, Acts iv. 5, &c. In wu 14

22 ISAIAIT. [cHap. II.
and prophet, and soothsayer and elder ; * the captain of fifty
and the man of repute, and the counsellor and the skilful
» artificer, and the expert enchanter. 4 And I will make youths
to be their princes, and with wilfulness shall they rule over
them. °And the people shall oppress one another, man
against man, and neighbour against neighbour ; they shall
behave boisterously, the child towards the old man, and the
mean man towards the honourable. ® When a man shall take
hold of his brother in his father’s house, ‘Thou hast clothing,
thou shalt be our judge, and let this ruin be under thy hand :’
> Magician, Ew., Weir.

(see note) they are referred to as ‘tythings.’ See Church Quarterly

princes’ or ‘ principal men’ ; they
are also included under the term
‘counsellor’ in vw. 2. Prophet
and soothsayer are classed to-
gether, like ‘mighty man and man
of war’; they are nearly the same
in meaning, at any rate from the
point of view which the prophet
here assumes. So Jer. xxix. 8 ; cf.
Mic. iii. 11, Ezek. xxii. 28. It does
not appear that the prophets denied
the reality of magical powers, though
they did assert that the use of them
without the direction and assistance
of Jehovah was an act of rebellion
against the God of gods (see further
on vii, 11). Nor does Isaiah ap-
pear to have denied the prophetic
character to those who held lower
views of the Divine nature. He
classes the degenerate prophets
with the degenerate priests, and up-
braids the former because, when
they might have prophesied ‘right
things,’ they uttered ‘deceits’ (xxx.
10). Jeremiah, however, has had
it revealed to him that there
are false prophets (xxiii. 25-32),
though the invention of the phrase
‘false prophet,’ is due to the Sept.
(e.g. xxxili, 1-16 Sept.).

3 Captain of fifty] The leader
of the smallest division of the army
(2 Kings i. 9), but also apparently
a civil officer (comp. Ex. xviii. 21,
25), just as in Jer. xxvi. 21 the e7b-
dorim or ‘mighty men’ are treated
as men of weight in civil affairs.
The fifty was a technical term,
analogous to our ‘hundreds’ and

Review (July 1880, p. 429).
Skilful artificer] Artisans are
particularly mentioned as sharing
the captivity of Jehoiachin, 2 Kings
xxiv. 14, Jer. xxiv. 1. Alt. render-
ing is no doubt plausible. (Ps. viii.
6, Hebr.) Magic practices were
highly developed in the Semitic
East, and even as it would seem in
Jerusalem. Still, we have already
two designations of soothsayers,
and we can hardly spare the arti-
ficers, on whom so much depended
in times of war (for machines) as
well as of peace.

4-7 Thus deprived of its dpsoror,
Judah will become a prey to an
anarchy such as had already be-
fallen Israel. —— Youths their
princes] Only youths would desire
such a miserable kingdom; and
their childish capriciousness would
contribute to the general misery.
A specimen of the latter was given
by Ahaz (see on v. 12), and after
him by Manasseh (king at 12).

® The distress shall be so great
that any one who is still possessed
of a respectable outer garment shall
be importuned to accept the govern-
ment, and shall protest against the
dubious honour. In his father's
house] Where brothers would
naturally meet, opposed to ‘my
house’ afterwards. A binder-
up] One to hold together the frag-
ments of the state ; comp. xxx. 26,
‘bindeth up the breach of his
people’ ; or, a binder-up of wounds,
a surgeon.

CHAP. II] ISAIAH. 23
The shall lift up (his voice) on that day, saying, ‘I will not be
a binder-up, for in my house is neither bread nor clothing ; ye
shall not appoint me to be a judge of the people.’

8 For Jerusalem is sunk into ruin, and Judah is fallen, be-
cause their tongue and their deeds have been against Jehovah,
to defy the eyes of his glory. ®°Observation of their face
witnesseth against them, and their sin they have declared
like Sodom, undisguisedly : alas for themselves, for they have
achieved for themselves misfortune. '°(4 Happy is the right-
eous! for it is well, for the fruit of their deeds they shall eat.
1 Alas for the wicked! II]! for the achievement of his hands
shall be given him.) !'? My people—his governor is a wilful
child, and women rule over him: my people—thy guides are
misleading, and the way of thy paths they have swallowed up.
8 Jehovah is stationed to plead, and standeth to judge the

© So Ges., Weir, Naeg.—The expression, Del.
4 So Duhm ; pronounce ye happy, &c., Lo. ; say ye of the righteous that, TExT.

8 The prophet now justifies the
foregoing gloomy description. He
speaks of Judah, chiefly as repre-
sented by the ruling classes.
Hath come to rain] The perfect
of prophetic certainty ——Their
tongue] ie., their language. Obs.
the importance attached to words
as revelations of character, both in
O. and N. T,, viii. 9, 13, Ps. xciv.,
4, Matt. v. 22, xii. 36, 37 The
eyes of his glory] Jehovah’s
glory is the outward manifestation
of his invisible essence. Through
this glory he enters into. relation
with the world, which is described,
anthropomorphically, as ‘looking
out upon the children of men.’

® Observation of their face]
Their character may be read by a
keen glance at their face. Alt. rend.
is rather too distant from the pri-
mary meaning of the Hebrew, but
the difference is unimportant.
Sodom] An example of shame-
lessness, Gen. xix. 5.

10,11 These verses rather inter-
rupt the connection, but supply a
beautiful example of parallelism.
They assert the doctrine of ‘future
rewards and punishments’ in a
spiritual and not a mechanical
sense. Good deeds ripen into

happiness, as evil deeds into misery.
Comp. Ps. lviii. 11 Q. P. B.

2 His governor is a wilful
child] Isaiah means a child in
character rather than in age, for
Ahaz was probably twenty-five (i.e.,
five years older than Solomon,
Ewald, iii. 208 ; comp. iv. 167) when
he came to the throne. His timidity
was shown in the Syro-Israelitish
invasion (vii. 2, 2 Kings xvi. 5, 7);
his effeminacy appears from the
next clause of this verse, and his
hankering for novelties from 2 Kings
xvi. 10.—Thy guides .. .] Lit.
‘thy righteners, those who should
lead thee in the right way, a duty
commended to the ruling class in
i, 23. A delicate irony! So ix 16,
—Swallowed up] ie., effaced.
Similarly xxv. 7, 8.

13 No effect has been produced
by the friendly pleadings of the
prophet. Now the scene changes.
Jehovah standeth to plead judi-
cially. The same phrase is used in
the same sense in Ps. Ixxxii. 1,
though critics doubt whether the ob-
jects of the judgment are human or
superhuman beings. Elsewhere we
read that Jehovah ‘sitteth (i.e., on
his heavenly throne) to judge (Joel
iii. 12, Ps. ix. 4). Here the figure

24
peoples.

ISAIAH.

(CHAP. III.

4 Jehovah will enter into judgment with the elders

of his people, and its princes: ‘So then ye have eaten up
the vineyards, the plunder of the afflicted is in your houses,
1° What mean ye that ye crush my people, and grind the face

of the afflicted ?’

Oracle of the Lord, Jehovah Sabdoth.

6 And Jehovah said, Because the daughters of Zion are
proud, and go with outstretched throat and ogling eyes—go

is different. Jehovah stands in a
menacing attitude ready to hurl his
bolt ; whether in heaven or on earth
(comp. Mic. i. 2) the prophet does
not say.—The peoples] Jehovah
has revealed himself as the Gad,
and consequently as the Judge, of
all the nations of the world. But
Isaiah merely hints at this, and
devotes himself rather to the case
of Jerusalem, which has such griev-
ous need of purification, before the
‘many nations’ can go up thither
for spiritual teaching. We might
express the relation between vv.
13, 14 thus: ‘Jehovah, when setting
himself to judge the worid, shall
first enter into the case of the
princes of his chosen people Israel’
(Roorda). Comp. Ps. ix. 7, 8.

M4 Elders ... princes] See on
v. 2. From Ex. xvili. 13-26 it ap-
pears that the ‘elders’ originally
performed judicial functions ——So
then ye... .] The prophet skips
over the examination of the wit-
nesses, and gives only the latter part
of the summing up of the judge.
‘Ye’ is emphatic. Ye, from whom
such different conduct was to be
expected, have ‘eaten up the vine-
yard’ (see v. 7). ‘He that toucheth
you toucheth the apple of his eye,
is Jehovah’s word elsewhere (Zech.
ii. 8).

15 Grind the face] Isaiah uses
the strongest of metaphors to de-
scribe the cruel injustice of which
the poor were the subjects. Its op-
posite is ‘to smooth the face,’ i.e. to
entreat the favour (Ps. xlv. 12 A. V.).
A similar metaphorical passage in
Mic. ili. 2, 3.

‘© And Jehovah said] Here a
new discourse begins, which these
words loosely connect with the
foregoing prophecy (see Introd.)

It concerns the ladies of Jerusalem
(comp. xxxii. 9-12), whose love of
dress, expressing their inward pride,
is threatened with condign punish-
ment. Twenty-one articles are men-
tioned (some of which are still very
general among Syrian ladies), and
the difficulty of explaining all the
names from the Hebrew shows
that this toilette-luxury was not
of native origin; comp. Zeph. i.
8: ‘all such as are clothed with
Joreign clothing” To judge from
the names we should suspect Syrian
and Arabian influences, though it
must be admitted that modern
Arabic names of clothing do not at
all correspond; nor has any light
as yet been derived from the Assy-
rian, Quantity, it is evident, was
as much sought after as quality, by
the fashionable ladies of Jerusalem,
Rings and chains, head-dresses and
veils, upper and under garments,
occur in a profusion which it is
difficult to represent. All this was
doubtless alien to primitive simpli-
city, though Judges v. 30 warns us
that the deflection from simplicity
began long before Isaiah.—There is
a somewhat parallel passage in the
Koran (Sura xxiv. 31) beginning
with the words, ‘ And speak to the
believing women that they refrain
their eyes, and observe continence,’
and ending, ‘And let them not strike
their feet together,’ &c. (referred to
by Drechsler). Comp. also the tirade
of Sacchetti, the Italian novelist,
against the fashions of the Flo-
rentine women of the fourteenth
century (he mentions 77/er alia,
feet-chains), by which Longfellow
illustrates the prophetic denuncia-
tion of Dante, Purgat. xxiii. 10€-
111.—The only monographs on the
Israelitish toilette are still those of

CHAP. I11.]

tripping along and tinkling

ISAIAH.

25

with their feet: '’ therefore

Jehovah will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the
daughters of Zion, and Jehovah will make bare their secret

parts.

18Tn that day Jehovah will take away the finery of

the anklets, the * wreaths and the crescents ; the ear-drops
and the arm-chains and the fine veils ; ®° the diadems and the
stepping-chains and the girdles; and the scent-bottles and
the amulets ; the seal-rings and the nose-rings ; 7 the state-
dresses and the tunics, and the wrappers and the purses ;

the ©mirrors, and the linen
4 Little suns, Ew., Naeg.

Schréder and Hartmann, the one
entitled Commentatio philologico-
critica de vestitu mulierum Hebre-
arum (Lugd. Bat. 1745); the other,
Die Hebrierin am Putztische und
als Braut (3 vols. Amsterd. 1809).
Part of the latter has been repro-
duced in a popular form by De
Quincey (Works, vol. xi.).—Ewald
thinks there is a method in the
order of the catalogue; first the
ornaments of the feet, then those
of the head, then (vv. 22, 23) the
larger dresses; but this requires
some violence to carry it out.——
Tripping . and tinkling|
‘The melodious chime of the
silver ankle-bells, keeping time
with the motions of the feet, made
an accompaniment so agreeable
to female vanity, that the stately
daughters of Jerusalem, with their
sweeping trains flowing after them,
appear to have adopted a sort of
measured tread, by way of impres-
sing a regular cadence upon the
music of their feet’ (De Quincey,
xi. 123).

18 The anklets] i.e., rings of sil-
ver or some other metal worn round
the ankles; hence the verb ren-
dered ‘tinkling’ in wv. 16.
Wreaths] Explainedin the Talmud
of awreath worn round the forehead,
from one ear to the other (Buxtorf).
LXX. ra édurdcxa. Alt. rend. is
also plausible, but involves com-
parison of the Arabic (‘wreath’ is
from the Aramaic). Crescents |
Lit. little moons. These were
hung upon the neck, Judg. viii. 21,

shifts and the turbans and the
© Gauzes, Ew.

26 (Midianitish). Originally, per-
haps, talismans. They still find a
place in the Arab toilette.

18 Ear-drops] See Judges viii. 26
(Midianitish).

20 Diadems] The words used for
the tiaras of priests, Ex xxxix. 28 ; of
bridegrooms, Ixi. 10. Stepping-
chains], connecting the anklets,
and so enabling their wearers to go
‘tripping along’ wv. 16. Girdles]
Costly girdles such as brides wore,
Jer. ii. 32, comp. Isa xlix. 18.
Amulets| These were evidently in
the form of ornaments. Probably
ear-rings are meant here, such as
those which Jacob took away and
buried (Gen, xxxv. 4, Targ. g’da-
shayya, ‘holy things’). Similar
amulets are still worn by Eastern
women.

21 Seal-rings] Worn on the fin-
ger (Jer. xxii. 24). Levy’s mono-
graph (Szege/ und Gemmen, Breslau,
1869) includes an account of extant
seals and gems from the pre-exile
period.

» state-dresses] Named _ in
Hebr. from their being put off when
the occasion for their use was over.
In Zech. iii. 4 the word is used of
the splendid high-priestly robes.
——Tunics] i.e., the uppermost of
the two under-dresses, richly em-
broidered, and bound with a superb
girdle.—wrappers]suchas Ruth
put on over her best clothes when
she went to Boaz (Ruth iii. 15).

3 Mgirrors] i.e., hand-mirrors,
made of polished metal (probably
copper) plates; comp. Ex. xxxviii.

26 ISAIAH, [CHaP. Iv.

large veils. *4 And it shall come to pass: instead of perfume
there shall be rottenness; and instead of a girdle, a rope ;
and instead of artificial curls, baldness, and instead of a
mantle, a girding of sackcloth, a brand instead of beauty.
2 Thy people shall fall by the sword, and thy forces in war.
> And her gates shall sigh and lament, and she shall be
emptied, sitting upon the ground. Iv. ' And seven women
shall take hold of one man in that day, saying, ‘Our own
bread will we eat, and our own clothing will we wear: only
let us be called by thy name ; take away our disgrace.’

CHAPTER IV. 2 ETc.

2-6. A short section full of glorious promises. Why so short? Be-
cause the proper subject of the discourse to which this section belongs is
not promise but threatening. The two passages which have a different
scope (ii. 2-4, and iv. 2-6) are evidently inserted to relieve the dark tints

of the picture.

They describe the fair future of the purified Jerusalem,

the one from without, the other chiefly from within.

?In that day shall the *growth of Jehovah be for beauty
® Sprout, Ew., Del.

8, Job xxxvii. 18, and the com-
mentators on I Cor. xiii. 12. Glass
indeed may possibly have been
known! through the Pheenician
traders. Bottles and vases of that
material have been found both at
Nimrid and at Khorsabad (Lay-
ard’s Discoveries, 195~6), while in
Egypt glass-blowing was known at
least as early as the reign of the first
Osirtasen (Wilkinson, iii. 88).——
Large veils] Comp. Cant. v. 7.

25,20 Phy people . . . her gates]
referring to Zion.
Iv. }Seven women... ] ‘A

companion picture to iii. 6, where
the surviving men lay hold on one
who has bread and clothing to make
him their kadi. The male popula-
tion are in search of a ruler; the
women in search of a husband’
(Dr. Weir). Our disgrace] The
disgrace of being childless (Gen.

Xxx. 23), immortality being re-
garded as a family, not a personal,
privilege.

?In that day] That is, after this
destruction, says Alexander, with
most of the commentators. This,
however, is a superficial view. It
will be observed that the phrase
has been used five times since ‘ the
day of Jehovah’ was first mentioned
in li, 12, and in very different con-
texts. Hitherto it has pointed to
some feature in the divine punish-
ment of the sinners, but now it
refers to the mercies of the saved.
How can we account for this diver-
sity of scope? Only on the theory,
forced upon us by a wide examina-
tion of prophecy, that the contents
of the prophetic revelations of the
Messianic period are unconditioned
by time (comp. 2 Pet. iii. 8). It is
not a series of successive events

1 I do not quote Job xxviii. 17, ‘gold and glass,’ as the poem of Job cannot be as

early as Isaiah.

CHAP. IV.]

ISAIAH.

27

and honour, and the fruitage of the land for a pride and

which is unfolded before us, but
rather processes which may in fact
be going on simultaneously, though
one may be more prominent at
one time and another at another.
The punishment of the sinners
and the mercies of the saved are
different aspects of one and the
same eternal purpose of God.——
The growth of Jehovah ... the
fruitage of the land] ‘And Jeho-
vah their God shall deliver them
in that day: as the flock of his
people. . . . For how great is his
goodness, and how. great is his
beauty ! corn shall make the young
men stalwart, and new wine the
virgins ;’ Zech. ix. 16,17. ‘And I
will raise up unto them a plantation
as (a matter for) renown, and they
shall no more be consumed with
hunger in the land ;’ Ezek. xxxiv.
29. These two passages may serve
to dissipate two objections which
may be urged against the above
rendering. First, it may be said,
that a reference to the natural pro-
ducts of Canaan strikes a jarring
note inthe prophecy. But it equally
seems to jar in Zechariah, and yet
all interpreters admit the necessity
of it. The truth is that a lengthened
fertility of the soil is one of the
most frequently recurring Messianic
features—see, besides the above
passages, Isa. xxx. 23, Am. ix. 13,
Hos. ii. 21, 22, Joel iii. 18. It may
be objected, secondly, that such a
reference lacks any point of contact
with the foregoing and the follow-
ing prophecy (for few will agree
with Ewald and Hofmann that
there is a contrast suggested be-
tween the natural beauty of the
divine gifts and the artificial luxu-
ries of the Hebrew women). The
answer is, that we have here only
an imperfect summary of Isaiah’s
discourses. In all probability, v. 2
is merely a condensed abstract of
a long section, and what that sec-
tion contained may be guessed from
the passage quoted from Ezekiel.
The idea of it probably was that
the supernatural fertility suddenly

granted to the soil should prevent
any evil consequences from the
previous desolation of the land of
Judah.

I have still to justify my explan-
ation of these two expressions on
phraseological grounds. 1. The two
expressions in the Hebr. are clearly
parallel ; they may of course be
either synonymous or antithetical ;
but considering that exactly the
same quality is predicated of each
of them, it is more natural to sup-
pose them to be synonymous, or
nearly so. 2. The fact that the
context is entirely connected with
the land of Judah shows that we
must render the Hebr. a-areg ‘the
land, and not ‘the earth.” Now
the phrase, ‘fruit of the land,’ and
the synonymous one ‘fruit of the
ground, occur twelve times in the
O. T., and always with reference to
vegetation. 3. The Hebr. cemakh,
though singular, is almost always
used collectively. See especially
Ixi. 11 and Gen. xix. 25. The ex-
ceptions are Jer. xxiii. 5, xxxiil. 15
(though even here Graf and Kuenen
take ¢emakh collectively); and Zech.
iii. 8, vi. 12. It must be observed,
however, that in Jer. the phrase is
‘Plant (A. V. branch) of David.’
This is clear, and therefore allow-
able; ‘plant of Jehovah’ is not
clear—indeed, it would almost in-
fallibly be misunderstood, with such
a phrase as ‘fruit of the land’ in
the parallel line. The only clear
rendering is ‘ plantation ( =plants)
of Jehovah,’ for which comp. Ps.
civ. 16. ‘The trees of Jehovah are
satisfied (with rain); the cedars of
Lebanon which he hath planted.’
[Ew. and Del. both render ‘ Sprout
of Jehovah,’ but the former explains
this collectively = ‘products,’ the
latter personally of the Messiah.
Del. fully admits that ‘fruit of the
land’ must be taken as synonymous
with this, and therefore explains
‘fruit ’as a personal designation, for
which he comps. Ezek. xvii. 5: ‘he
took of the seed of the land (i.e,
Zedekiah) and planted in a fruitful

28 ISAIAH.

adornment unto the escaped of Israel.

[cHaP. Iv.

3 And it shall come

to pass: he who is left in Zion, and remaineth in Jerusalem,
shall be called holy, everyone who is written down for life in
Jerusalem, ‘when the Lord shall have washed off the filth
of the daughters of Zion, and cleansed the blood of Jerusalem
from her midst by a blast of judgment, and a blast of ex-

termination.

field’ But I would ask, Could
Zedekiah have been called ‘seed
of the land’ except in a detailed
allegory? Calvin interprets liter-
ally as above, but thinks that the
unwonted temporal blessings are
types of spiritual ones, comp. xlv.
8. But there is nothing to indicate
this in our passage. So too H.
Schultz, A/ttest. Theologze, ed. 1, ii.
244. Naeg.’s view is too farfetched
to quote. Lagarde, Semztica, i. 8,
takes the ¢emakh to be ‘a de-
scendant of the Davidic house,
whom in a dark age Yahwé will
cause to be born, in antithesis to the
natural descendants now become
unprofitable” and compares the
Talmudic phrase ‘field of Baal’
=‘field nourished by rain.’ But
the opposite of this inthe Talmud is
—not ‘fruit of the land ’—but ‘field
of fountains,’ i.e., irrigated land.
See further in Last Words, vol. ii.}

3 The character of the surviving
citizens of Jerusalem shall be in
harmony with their outward pro-
sperity.——Shall be called] A
name, according to the primitive
belief, being a symbol of character,
and almost a part of personality.
In the Messianic period, this pri-
mitive belief will be uniformly veri-
fied by facts (xxxii. 5). Holy]
i.e., free from the contaminations
of sin (see v. 4), with the collateral
idea of inviolability, comp. vi. 13,
Ps. xciii. 5. Written down for
life] Their survival, then, was no
mere accident, but predestined. The
belief in predestination, observes
Ewald, was a ‘powerful lever’ of
Hebrew prophecy (Glaubenslehre,
ii. 208). For the ‘ book of Jehovah,’
or ‘the book of life, comp. Ex.
xxxil, 32, Ps. Ivi. 8, Ixix. 28, Mal.

5 And Jehovah shall create upon the whole site

iii. 16, Dan. xii. 1, Phil. iv. 3, Rev.
xiii, 8, xxi. 27.

4 when the Lord... ] This
is to be connected with v. 5; it
supplies the conditions on which
the fulfilment of the promise de-
pends. —The filth] i.e., the moral
defilement. The bloodshed]
refers chiefly to judicial murders (i.
15), but also perhaps to sacrifices
of children to Moloch. ‘And they
shed innocent blood, the blood of
their sons and of their daughters,
whom they sacrificed unto the idols
of Canaan ; and the land was pol-
luted with blood’ (Ps. evi. 38 ; comp.
Isa. Ivii. 5, Ezek. xxii. 2, 3)——
A blast of judgment] ie., of
punishment for the wicked. The
same Hebrew phrase in xxviii. 6
means ‘ sfzvz¢t of judgment.’ The
meaning ‘blast, however, is re-
quired here by the context, ‘judg-
ment’ being synonymously parallel
to ‘extermination.’ It is indeed
still the Divine energy, but being
exercised in the physical and not
the moral sphere, the rendering
‘spirit’ is inappropriate. Comp.
xxx. 27, where ‘lips’ and a ‘ tongue’
are spoken of ; also xi. 4 (end).
Extermination] A common ex-
pression for the putting away of
idolatry from the theocratic com-
munity ; Deut. xiii. 5 (6), xvii. 7, &c.

5 God’s felt presence, the pledge
of Zion’s security. The sign of this
presence shall be some new and spe-
cial exhibition of the Divine power,
hence the statement,Jehovah shall
create :—‘ Nam verbum creandi,
quo hic usus est Esaias, indicat ip-
sissimum esse Dei opus, non ho-
minum ’(Musculus). The word dara
does not occur again in I. Isaiah
(see crit. note). Upon the

CHAP. V.] ISAIAH. 29
of mount Zion, and upon her convocations, a cloud by day,
and smoke with the brilliance of a flaming fire by night.
For upon all (the) glory a ®canopy .... ® And it shall be a
pavilion for shade [by day] from the heat, and for a refuge
and for a shelter from storm and from rain.

b Is (or, shall be) a canopy, Ew., Del. (See below.)

CHAPTER V. .

ISRAEL'S ripeness for judgment, expressed first under the veil of a parable,
then ina list of the national sins, to which the corresponding punish-
ments are specified. The chapter bears evident marks of artistic arrange-
ment. Ewald, who on very plausible grounds attaches parts of chaps.
ix, and x. to it, proposes to distribute it thus,—Introduction, wv. 1-7 ;
section I, vv. 8-10, 173; II. 11-16; III. 18-24. He makes a fresh dis-
course begin at v. 25 (the Introduction), after which follows ix. 8-12 (sec-

tion I.), 13-17 (section II.), 18-21 (section III.), x. 1-4 (section IV.), and
as a finale v. 26-30.

‘Come, let me sing about my friend, * a love-song * about
his vineyard. A vineyard had my friend On a richly fruit-

s Lit. a song of love, Lowth, supposing the sign of abbreviation to have been
overlooked. Heb. text has, a song of my friend.

whole site... ] Strictly, upon
every (part of the) site. ‘Site’
(makon) here, as xviii. 4 and often,
= ‘sanctuary’ (compare Arab.
magaim).—— A. cloud by-day .. .]

end), but rather divined from the
context than unfolded from the five
Hebrew words. See crit. note
(vol. ii.)

° xt (Zion) shall be a pavilion

The first of a long series of refer-
ences to the Exodus (see Ex xiii.
21, 22). The powers of the world
will be as impotent for harm as the
Egyptians were at the Exodus.——
Upon all (the) glory ...] The
phrase is so abrupt as to be hardly
explicable ; have not some words
fallen out? Dr. Weir remarks:

‘There is an evident contrast be-
tween thetrue glory (that of Jehovah
and that which he gives) and all
false glory. Over the glory which
is not of Jehovah—such as that
described in chap. ii.—there is no
covering. It cannot endure. It
speedily fades. But over the glory
of Jehovah and his redeemed there
is a covering.” This is a worthy
meaning, I admit (comp. xxiv. 23

] Comp. Ps. xxvii. 5, xxxi. 20.
‘There shall be protection not only
against greater evils, but even
against lesser inconvenience : so
perfect shall be the happiness of
God’s people i in those days ; comp.
xlix. 10’ (Dr. Weir). “By day? seems
to me to have intruded by a clerical
error from the preceding verse ;
otherwise we should have a corre-
sponding ‘by night’ in the next line.

42 The parable takes the form
of a song, which from its melody
and its dancing rhythm might well
be a drinking-song, did not the
bitter irony of the close dispel the
illusion.——™y friend] i.e., Jeho-
vah. Comp. the proper names
David (i.e., friend, viz. of Jehovah),
Jedidiah, ‘beloved of Jehovah.’

30 ISAIAH. [CHAP. Vv.

ful height, ? And he digged it over, and cleared it of stones,
And planted it with choice vines, And built a tower in its
midst, Yea, and hewed out a wine-vat therein, And he hoped
for it to bear grapes, But it bore wild grapes.

3 And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah:
judge, I pray, between me and my vineyard. 4‘ What 1s there
still to be done to my vineyard which I have not done in it ?
why, when I hoped for it to bring forth grapes, brought it
forth wild grapes? * And now, let me tell you, I pray, what
I will do to my vineyard : take away its hedge, that it become
grazing-land ; break down its walls, that it serve for tramp-
ling upon: °and I will make an end of it, it shall neither be
pruned nor hoed, and shall grow up in thorns and briars ; and
to the clouds I will give a charge that they rain no rain upon

it. 7For the vineyard of Jehovah Sabdoth is the house of

——A love-song] By this read-
ing ‘we avoid the great impropriety
of making the author of the song,
and the person to whom it is ad-
dressed, to be the same’ (Lowth).
Height] Lit. horn ; an expres-
sion, common in Arabic for a small
isolated eminence. Comp. the
famous Kurtin Hattin (horns of
Hattin), the scene of Saladin’s vic-
tory over the last Crusaders ; also,
perhaps, Ashteroth-Karnaim (Gen.
xiv. 5). <Afertos Bacchus amat
colles, Virg. Georg. ii. 113.

2 See the striking parallel in the
Synoptic Gospels (Matt. xxi. 33-41,
&c.), and the allusion in Ezra ix. 9,
end, Ps. Ixxx. is also probably
composed with reference to Isaiah’s
allegory. Choice vines] Same
word as in Jer. ii. 21: ‘Yet I had
planted thee a noble vine’ (A.V.) ;
other forms in xvi. 8, Gen. xlix. 11.
The deep red colour of the grapes
was the origin of the name in Hebr.
Tower] i ¢.,a watch-tower ; see
on v. 5S.

3 The application. The prophet
loses himself in the thought of his
Divine sender. He first calls upon
his hearers to act as arbitrators ;
but they are condemned (see v. 5)
by their evil conscience (comp.
Luke xx. 16), and listen silently to
their sentence, viz. that the vine-

yard be left to itself, without any
fostering care, either from earth
or from heaven. For heaven, too,
is concerned, the mention of the
clouds in v. 6 preparing the way for
the solemn statement in v. 7. The
picture can still be recognised as
drawn to the life. Southern Pales-
tine, especially ‘the bare slopes
of Hebron, of Bethlehem, and of
Olivet, abounds in enclosures of
loose stone, each with a square grey
tower at the corner (Stanley, Szzaz
and Pal., 1st ed., p. 413). And
he hoped ...] The assonances
of the following words in the Hebr.
are inimitable.

7 Bloodshed] Lit. shedding.
Some have objected to this rend.,
because murder is not expressly
mentioned in the subsequent com-
plaints. But chap. v. cannot be
treated by itself. The develop-
ments are new, but all the funda-
mental ideas are those of chaps i.-
iv. Now murder is certainly a preva-
lent sin, according to these chapters
(i 15, 21, iv. 4), not to mention
that ‘laying field to field’ some-
times involved bloodshed (1 Kings
XXl.——A ory] either from the
blood of the murdered, according
to the striking symbolic language
of Gen. iv. 10, Job xvi. 18, or from
the oppressed (James v. 4).

CHAP V.] ISAIAH, 31

Israel, and the men of Judah his darling plantation ; and he
hoped for justice, but behold bloodshed, for righteousness,
but behold a cry.

8 Woe unto those who join house to house, who add field
to field, till there is no room left, and ye are made to dwell
alone within the land. ®In mine ears Jehovah Sabdoth [hath
spoken concerning them]: Surely many houses shall become
a desolation ; great ones and fair without inhabitants. 1° For
ten days’ work of vineyard shall yield one bath, and the seed
of a homer shall yield an ephah; and lambs shall graze
bupon their wilderness, and their ruined places kids shall de-

vour »

Woe unto those who rise up early to follow strong

> TEXT, as was said concerning them, and sojourners shall devour the ruins of

the fat (Targ.).—Kids (for ‘sojourners’), Sept., Ew.

8 Here begins the evidence of
Israel’s criminality before Jehovah.
One by one the national sins are
counted up, and each receives an
exactly suitable punishment. The
first sin is the attempt to concen-
trate the landed property in a
few hands.——W ho _ join house to
house... ] i.e., by violently ex-
pelling the poorer proprietors, see
Job xx. 19, Mic. ii. 1-5, Ezek.
xlvi. 18 ; and comp. Deut. xix. 14,
Job xxiv. 2. Whatever be the date
of ‘jubilee’ as a law of the state,
the accumulation of landed proper-
ties was diametrically opposed to
the spirit and early practice of the
traditional Israelitish law of land-
tenure (comp. 1 Kings xxi. 4).
Comp. Mr. Fenton’s illustrations of
this land-law from the systems of
Village Communities, Zarly He-
brew Life, 1880. Pliny’s complaint
that the /atifundia had ruined Italy
has only a distant relation to our pas-
sage.——To dwell alone] Comp.
Ps. xlix. 11: ‘They have called
lands by their own names’ (Del.) ;
Job xxii. 8: ‘And the man of force.
to him belongeth the land, and he
who is respected shall dwell therein.’

xn mine ears ... | All agree
that some word or words are neces-
sary to complete the text. Jewish
scholars suggest ‘ The cry of the op-
pressed hath come up, and ‘ saith,’
or ‘for I am’ (before ‘Jehovah

(See further crit. note.)

Sabdoth ’) :—so A.E., Kimchi, Luz-
zatto. The moderns mostly under-
stand ‘And hath revealed himself:
(viz. Jehovah Sabdoth), comparing
xxii. 14 (a doubtful passage, how-
ever). But I do not feel certain
that such important words can be
left to be understood ; my own
impression is that some words
have dropped out of the text.
The kameg in Jeoznai shows that
those who affixed the points sup-
posed an ellipsis.

1017 Retributive justice: barren-
ness sent upon the ill-gotten land.
Ten days’ work] i.¢.,so much
ground as a yoke of oxen can
plough in a day. One bath} A
liquid measure = about 7 gallons,
4 pints. A homer] A dry mea-
sure = 32 pecks, I pint. Assyrian,
7mer. An ephah] The tenth
part of a homer. And lambs
.. . ] The transference of these
words was suggested by Ewald.
‘Lambs’ and ‘sojourners’ in alt.
read. were probably meant to be
taken as descriptions of the meek-
spirited Jewish sojourneys in Baby-
lon. If we once admit that ‘lamhs’
is to be taken literally, we must give
up ‘sojourners,’ which can no longer
be explained naturally. (Comp. ed.
2, where ‘ sojourning’ was adopted,
with reference to the ‘lambs’ of
the nomad pastoral tribes.)

11-16 Second woe: on the luxuri-

32

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. V.

drink ; who sit long in the twilight, the wine inflaming them ;
” and lute and cymbal, timbrel and flute, and wine, is their
feast, but the work of Jehovah they regard not, and the

operation of his hands they do not see.

'8 Therefore my

people goeth into exile unawares, and his honourable ones
are ‘sucked out with hunger,° and his tumultuous ones

parched with thirst.

¢ So Hitz., Ew , Bottcher (see crit. note).

4 Therefore Sheol enlargeth her greed,

Hebr. text, ‘men of hunger,’ ‘ starve-

lings’ (or, dead |7é¢hé] from hunger, Sept., Pesh., Vulg., Targ., A.E.).

V7ho rise up early .. |
‘Tempestiva convivia’; comp.
Eccles. x. 16, 17. ‘Strong drink’
(shékar, Ass. stkdriu), means arti-
ficial wine, made of dates, apples,
pomegranates, honey, barley, and
sometimes spiced or of mixed in-
gredients (hence ‘to mix strong
drink, v. 22).

2 yute and cymbal] Comp.
Am. vi. 5, 6. On the nature of
these instruments see an excursus
by Wetzstein, in Delitzsch’s /esaia,
2nd ed. he work of Jehovah]
History being the realisation of
God’s eternal purposes (comp.
Xxxvii. 26, ii. 11), whether of grace,
or, as the next verse shows them to
be here (‘unawares’) of punishment.

18 Goeth into exile] In_ the
Hebr. it is the perfect of prophetic

ous.

certitude.——Unawares] Without
their having foreseen the divine
judgment.

“ Yherefore Sheél . ] To
understand this passage, we must
remember that there was a twofold
conception of Shedl or Hades.
First, it was localised underground.
Hence one of the synonyms for
Hades both in Hebrew and Assy-
rian is ‘the pit” Hence too perhaps
‘the valley of deadly shade’ (Ps.
xxiii. 4), and still more certainly
phrases in Ps. Ixili. 9, Ixxxvi. 13.
Comp. note on xxxvili. 10. Next,
it was conceived of as a person ;
comp. xiv. 9 (note), xxviii. 15, Hos.
xiil, 14, Jon. ii. 2, Cant. viii. 6,
Prov. i. 12, xxx. 16, Rev. vi. 8, xx.
13, 14. The two conceptions are
very closely connected; thus the
Greek Hades and the Teutonic
Hel were variously applied to the

infernal ruler and to his, or her,
kingdom ; comp. too the notion
of the stars as both material and
spiritual, Job xxxviii. 7, The Jews
also, like the Greeks, spoke of a
‘king of terrors’ (Job xviii. 14),
and the Apocalypse gives us this
king’s name—Abaddon (Rev. ix.
11), which is a synonym for Shedl
in Prov. xv. 11.—Shedl is here
treated as a feminine (like the
names of countries); in xiv. 9d
(see note) it becomes a masculine.
Down goeth her splendour]
‘Splendour’ = nobility. The phrases
chosen form a striking contrast
with the still, dim, and mournful
life of Hades. It has been in-
ferred from the Biblical descrip-
tions (e.g. Job ili. 13, &c.) that the
shades (Rephadim) in Sheél share
a common Jot, but against this may
be urged (1) that the Hades of the
N. T. comprehended two large
divisions for the good and the bad
respectively (‘Abraham’s bosom’
and Geenna), though of course the
distinction may not have been
known to Isaiah, and may have
been affected by non-Jewish in-
fluences; and (2) that the Baby-
lonians and Assyrians seem to have
recognised a difference among the
shades corresponding to their con-
duct upon earth (comp. on xiv. 9).—
The parallel Assyrian view of
Hades may be best gathered from
the Legend of Ishtar in the sixth
tablet of the Izdubar Series (see
Schrader, Die Hollenfahrt Istars,
1874, Smith’s Chaldean Genesis, ed.
Sayce, 1880, pp. 239-246). It is,
however, only Assyrian by adop-
tion ; its origin is Accadian. This

CHAP. V.] ISAIAH. 33

and openeth her mouth without measure, and down gocth
her splendour and her tumult and her uproar, and that
which is jubilant in her. So the earth-born is bowed down,
and the man brought low, and the eyes of the haughty are
brought low, '§ but Jehovah Sabdoth is exalted in judgment,
and the holy God showeth himself holy through righteous-
ness. ...

18 Woe unto those who 4 draw iniquity 4 with cords of un-
godliness, and sin as with cart-ropes ; !? who say, Let his work
hasten, let it speed, that we may see it, and let the counsel
of Israel’s Holy One draw near and come, that we may know
it. *°Woe unto those who call evil good, and good evil ;
that put darkness for light, and light for darkness ; who put
bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter. 2! Woe unto those
who are wise in their own eyes, and in their own view are un-
derstanding. ®*Woe unto those who are mighty ones—for
drinking wine, and valiant men—for mixing strong drink;
73 who declare the wicked righteous for a bribe, and take away

4 Draw guilt near, Ew., Naeg.—Draw punishment near, Ges.
g B: P'

accounts, as Schrader remarks, for
its non-occurrence among those
Semitic nations which, like the
Arabs, preserved the freshness of
their individuality.

15 The words of this and the fol-
lowing verse are mainly taken from
ii. 9, 11, 17, but with a modification
in the meaning.

16 Zhe holy God... ] Since
Israel will not ‘count Him holy’
(viii. 13) by obeying His messages
and His word, Jehovah must restore
the balance by a judicial display of
His righteousness.

18-23 Short woes on various sorts
of impiety, connected by their com-
mon share in the retribution de-
scribed in v, 24. The first, on those
who draw iniquity with cords of
ungodliness. ‘ Ungodliness’ is the
disposition which deliberately seeks
for opportunities of committing
‘iniquity.’ Literally, it means ‘emp-
tiness.’ In their ‘emptiness’ of true
religion, these men allow them-
selves to be yoked to sin like beasts
of burden. The same figure in the
Rig-Veda, ii. 48, ‘undo the rope of

VOL. I.

sin’ (transl. Max Miller). Alt. rend.
means, in one form, that they not
only fall into sin, but actually court
it; or, in the other form, that by
persisting in sin they invite punish-
ment (comp. the Hindu and Bud-
dhist doctrine of arma).

18 The climax of their sin :—
scoffing unbelief in the Divine
retribution (comp. Am. vi. 3, Jer.
xvii. 15). That we may know
it] Viz., by experience (ix. 9).

20 The second short woe on those
who confound or rather reverse the
distinctions of good and evil, who
say ‘Fair is foul, and foul is fair,’
Comp. Job xvii. 12,

*1 The third, on those who are
wise in their own eyes, and do
not fear Jehovah (Prov. iii, 7), Per-
haps an allusion to the indifferentist
or humanist section of the class of
‘wise men,’ who had no positive
religious beliefs,

*28 The fourth, on corrupt
judges who sacrifice justice to meet
the demands of an expensive luxu-
riousness. Who are mighty
ones... ] ‘ Very valiant trencher-

D

34

the righteousness of the righteous from him.

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. Vv.

24 Therefore,

as the fire’s tongue devoureth stubble, and hay sinketh in
a flame, so their root shall become as rottenness, and their
blossom go up as dust, because they despised the instruction of
Jehovah Sabdoth, and spurned the word of Israel’s Holy One,

2 Therefore the anger of Jehovah is kindled against his
people, and he stretcheth out his hand over it, and smiteth it,

men!’ Comp. Jer. xxiii. 10, end

Q. P. B.\——¥or mixing strong
drink] The phrase means, not ‘to
dilute wine with water,’ but to com-
pound rightly artificial wine (see on
v. 11),which was apparently stronger
than the natural wine.

24 All these sins have one com-
mon characteristic—the obstinate
rejection of that word which is the
only source of happiness. Their
punishment will be sudden and self-
evolved. This is expressed by a
combination of two figures, the first
borrowed from the custom of burn-
ing part of the stubble, the ashes
being used for manure ; the second
from a decaying tree. Comp. Job
xviii. 16, The fire’s tongue] A
vivid and natural personification,
comp. 1 Kings xviii. 38, Acts li. 3.

#5-30 A further development of
the preceding woe. The language
is vague, but there seems no rea-
sonable doubt that the Assyrians
are the people referred to; the
Assyrian policy of deportation has
already been alluded to in vw. 13.
It is, however, very uncertain
whether these verses originally
stood at the end of this prophecy.
Ewald (and so 7, C. A.) regards
them as containing the prologue
(v. 25), and the epilogue (vv. 26-
30), of a new prophecy, which was
the third and last part of a prophetic
work beginning at ii. 2, and the
body of which prophecy was formed
by ix. 8-x. 4.. There are too many
examples on a smaller scale of pas-
sages being misplaced in MSS., for
us to consider this at all an improb-
able hypothesis; and while the
section v. 1-24, is no loser by vv.
25-30 being thus removed from it,
there can be no doubt that the pro-
phecy ix. 8-x. 41s greatly the gainer

by it. As it stands, that prophecy
is thoroughly enigmatical; but, with
the addition of v. 25 and wv. 26~
30, it becomes both well-rounded
and fairly intelligible. Obs., the
closing words of v. 25 occur four
times over in ix. 8-x. 4.—It is just
possible, however, that the passage
In question (v. 25-30), has a double
right of existence, and that though
originally written for the place
where Ewald would put it, Isaiah
himself appended it to chap. v.,
without intending to remove it from
its original place. He certainly
does not mind repeating himself,
at any rate on a smaller scale, see
on v. 15, and comp. x. 22 with
XXVIII 22.

25 Zs kindled] The prophetic
perfect, if the verse be read in its
present context, but the historical
one, if read as Ewald would have it.
According to him, the prophet’s
discourse rises here to a wide histo-
rical survey, extending into the past
and the future. ‘ Once (during the
present generation) Yahvé mani-
fested himself also in Jerusalem as
the God who inflicts rigorous chas-
tisement . . . but that was only a
first stroke ; he threatens to strike
still further. In the last words we
have the fundamental utterance

. of the four following larger
strophes, in which the discourse
takes new starts in order to follow
out this thought’ (Prophets, ii. 54).
Other critics regard the judgment
as belonging to the near future.
Ewald naturally thinks of the earth-
quake of Uzziah, Am. i. 1, Zech.
xiv. 5; but earthquakes probably
were no rarity in Palestine (see
Dr. Pusey on Am. iv. 11, and
comp. Plumptre, Pib/ical Studies,
p- 136).

CHAP. v.] ISAIAH. 35

so that the mountains tremble, and their carcases become as
refuse in the midst of the streets. For all this his anger turneth
not back, but his hand is stretched out still.

*% And he lifted up a signal to ®a distant nation, and
hisseth to him from the end of the earth ; and, behold, hastily
swiftly he cometh; * there is none weary and none that
stumbleth therein, he slumbereth not and sleepeth not; the
girdle of his loins is never loosed, nor the thong of his shoes
torn: whose arrows are sharpened, and all his bows bent,
his horses’ hoofs accounted as flint, and his wheels as the
whirlwind : ® a roar hath he like that of the lioness, he roareth
like the young lions, moaning and catching the prey and
carrying it off safe, and none can rescue. * And there is a
moaning over him in that day like the moaning of the Sea,
and if he look unto the earth, ‘behold distressful darkness,
yea, the light becomes dark through the clouds thereof

e So La., We. Text in plural,
£ So Vulg., Weir, Naeg., (thick darkness, &c., Ew.).—Lo, darkness—(now) dis-
tress, and (now) light—it becometh dark in the cloudy sky thereof, Del. (but see crit.

note).

26-80 The future described as in
prophetic vision. A signal] So
in both parts of Isaiah, xi. 10, 12,
Xvili. 3, xiii. z, xlix. 22, xii. 1o.——
To a distant nation] For Jeho-
vah is the governor of the world.
The ‘nations’ are those of the
Assyrian empire.——Hisseth] The
Assyrians likened to bees, as in vii.
18. To him] because the various
elements of the Assyrian army are
directed by a single will, comp.
xvii, 13. Obs. the effective myste-
riousness of the description ;—the
invaders are not yet named.
Swiftly] The Assyrians and Baby-
lonians (Hab. i. 6, 8) were famous
for their rapid marches.

27 None that stumbleth] The
description given of Israel in Ps.
CV. 37.

28 all his bows bent] The
chief weapons of the Assyrians
(comp. the engravings in Layard).
So xxi. 15. As flint] Shoeing
being unknown, the solidity of a
hoof was of prime importance.
Comp. //. v. 329. Hence Am. vi.
12 ‘speaks of it as a thing as much
impracticable to make horses run
upon a hard rock, as to plough up

the same rock with oxen’ (Lowth).
See also Ges.

? A roar... moaning] The
roar comes from the lion in quest
of prey, the moan or growl as he
springs upon his victim.

50 and there is a moaning over
him... | Ewald understands this
of thunder, as a sign of the Divine
displeasure. But considering that
the word used is the same as that
in the preceding verse, it would
seem that the subject of the verb
must be still the lion, i.e. the enemy
(Jer. vi. 23). Evw,’s object in so
explaining was to provide an anti-
thesis to the words ‘and if he look
unto the earth,’ comp. the parallel
passage, viii. 21,22, But we have
no right to interfere with the natural
meaning of the text. It would be
better to suppose that something
has dropped out, especially as the
last words of the verse are probably
more or less corrupt.m—Through
the clouds thereof] i.e., clouds of
misfortune, which hang over the
earth, darkening the bright day of
prosperity. A figure from eclipses,
comp. vili. 22; Joel iii. (iv.) 15,
Am. v. 18-20, Job iii. 5.

D2

36 ISAIAH. (CHAP. VI.

CHAPTER VI.

THE vision and prophetic call of Isaiah, and an accompanying revelation
of the mingled prospects of Israel.

In several ways a noteworthy chapter, but open to various interpret-
ations. That which will here be given assumes the absolute sincerity of
the writer, and that his narrative is generically different from the poetical
fictions of Goethe and Burns (the ‘ Zueignung ’ and the‘ Vision ’), and even
from the more naive imaginations of William Blake. The Old Testament
—not to mention the records of other religions—abounds in accounts of
experiences which were only possible to the inner eye (2 Kings vi. 17),
but which were not the less founded on facts. It may suffice to mention
the two visions of Micaiah (1 Kings xxii. 17, 19-22). If these are poetical
fictions, then it is impossible to discriminate between the naive truthful-
ness of primitive tradition and the scenic illusions of the contemporary
novelist. And so, too, it is in the passage before us. Isaiah simply and
sincerely claims to describe his personal experience. No doubt there may
have been a psychological starting-point for the vision in the early visits
of Isaiah to the temple of Jerusalem. The pealing trumpet on festival
days, and the Hallelujahs of the choir would produce a powerful impres-
sion upon his lively imagination. This is far from explaining the peculiar
experience which followed, but an impression of this kind would naturally
determine the general form of the vision.

It is, however, quite consistent with a belief in Isaiah’s veracity to
hold that the significance of the vision was not at first realised by him in
all its fulness. As Tholuck has remarked, the intelligibility of what a
prophet saw and heard in his inner man did not of itself involve his com-
prehension of its meaning. The difference between Moses and the ordi-
nary prophet consists, we are told, in this, that Jehovah spoke with the
former ‘mouth to mouth, even visibly, and not in dark speeches (or
enigmas)’ (Num. xii. 8), and the revelation connected with Isaiah’s in-
augural vision must, unless communicated magically, have been a ‘ dark
speech’ to him at first. The youth, whose ‘fervid zeal breaks forth on
the first word of encouragement,’ could not surely have at once realised
that his mission would only lead to the confirmation of his people in their
unbelief. As a matter of fact, we find that Isaiah’s hopefulness varies at
different stages of his career, but that he only once again paints the
future in colours of such a lurid hue, viz. xxxii. 13, 14. Now, if at the
very outset he had received a distinct assurance that his ministry would
be one ‘of condemnation, would he have been justified in indulging and
expressing hopes which God had told him could not be realised?! That
he was at any time addicted to rose-coloured dreams of the future is of
course entirely out of the question. But it is in perfect harmony with ‘the

1 Comp. /. C. A., pp. 21, 22. The position there asserted I have here substan-
tially maintained, though, as I hope, with greater clearness and decision. The doc-
trine of ‘a gracious proportion between the revelation vouchsafed and the mental
state of the person receiving it’ is admitted even by orthodox critics in Germany, and
it may be hoped that it will soon become more prevalent in England, :

CHAP. VI] ISAIAH.

37
analogy of faith’ to suppose that the ‘dark speech’ or ‘enigma’ of Isaiah’s
early vision lay in his mind and fructified, till at length he attained that full
insight into its meaning which is expressed in vv. 9-13. The immediate
object of the vision was to set before Isaiah the ideal of prophecy as a
life-work, as opposed to the primitive view connecting it too closely with
isolated ecstatic moments, Isaiah stands, in consequence of this revela-
tion, between two schools of prophecy. To his predecessors, the source
of inspiration was more or less external and intermittent ; to him, it was
internal and perennial. Even Amos (if, at least, chaps. vii.-ix. are to be
interpreted literally) seems to have needed to be occasionally rapt into
the ecstatic state ; Isaiah, so far as we know, had but one vision, but that
one gave him a stimulus and a theme for his whole ministry.

Compare the inaugural visions of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, the form of
which was presumably influenced by the vision of Isaiah. The superior
genius of the latter is unmistakeable.

It is a probable conjecture that chap. vi. originally formed the preface
to a small collection of prophecies of Isaiah, viz. either chaps. ii.-v., or
more probably vii. 1-ix. 7. :

1In the death-year of King Uzziah, I saw * Jehovah sitting
upon a high and exalted throne, and his train filled the palace,
? Seraphim were standing above him ; each one had six wings,

® So many MSS. ; the Lord, Baer’s ed. of Massoretic text. (I have not every-

where marked such changes).

1 an the death-year .. .] B.C.
740. It has been doubted whether
the vision took place before or after
the death of Uzziah. But if the
latter, should we not expect ‘in the
first year of king Jotham’? The
heading, too, in i, 1 favours the
view that the vision dates from the
reign of Uzziah. At any rate, our
present account of the vision be-
longs to a later reign. I saw
Jehovah . . .] The received text
bears witness to the arbitrary pro-
cedure of the scribes of the pre-
-Massoretic age,! who sought to
mitigate the naive boldness of the
early writers (comp. 6 Kupuos of
Sept.). Generally the Massoretic
critics restored the true reading,
saving their conscience, doubtless,
by the rule of pronouncing Adonai
where the text read Yahveh (Je-
hovah). Now, as to the picture
presented by Isaiah, which is that
of a king on his throne, attended
on each side by courtiers (comp. I
Kings xxii. 19). Isaiah stands at

the threshold of the palace (see
v. 4), and sees no more than ‘the
skirts’ of the royal mantle (comp,
Ex. xxxiii. 20-23). The two rows
of courtiers alternately raise a cry
of praise, The palace] Heb.
(ha) hékal = Ass. “kallu = great
house (through Accadian). A great
hall must have been the primary
conception of atemple. Jehovah’s
heavenly palace or temple is meant
here (Ps. xi.4, xxix. 9, Hab. ii.
20), which, whatever may have
been the case with the temple at
Jerusalem, had no distinction be-
tween the Holy and the Holy of
Holies,

2 Seraphim] This is the only
place in the Bible where the Sera-
phim are described as supernatural
beings. The word svaphim does,
it is true, occur in Num. xxi. 6, but
there it meansa species of venom-
ous serpents (called svaphim from
their ‘ burning’ bite), which attacked
the Israelites in the desert; and
the singular saraph occurs in the

1 Geiger, Urschrift u. 5. w., p. 267.

38

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. VI.

with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet,

and with two he flew.

3 And the one kept crying to the other

and saying, Holy, holy, holy is Jehovah Sabdoth, The whole

same sense in Num. xxi. 8, Deut.
vill. 15, Isa. xvi. 29 (see note),
xxx. 6. Now, although it is quite
conceivable (considering the ana-
logy of Ezekiel’s Cherubim) that
animal forms might be introduced
into a description of heaven, it does
not appear that Isaiah did regard
the seraphim as animals in form, as
there is nothing but their wings and
their loud voice to distinguish them
physically from ordinary men. It
is his practice, moreover, as of the
Old Testament writers in general,
to use familiar phrases of mythical
origin, giving them a new turn ora
deeper, or at least a harmless, mean-
ing. No class of myths is more
abundant than that of serpent-
myths,! and it would be strange if
no trace of their currency in Pales-
tine could be found in the Old
Testament. But how are we to
reconcile the differences between
the two Biblical uses of the word
‘seraphim’? We may, I think, get
some light by considering the func-
tion of the Seraphim in Isaiah.
They are essentially the divine
guards, who keep everything that
is profane or unclean at a distance.
In this respect, they are strikingly
analogous to the Cherubim. Now
the Cherubim, as I have sought to
show on philological and analogical]
grounds,” are almost certainly (Iam
speaking of course of the extra-
Biblical, popular, mythic Cherubim)
the clouds of the storm or of the
sunset, comp. Ps. xviii. 10, 11, Ezek.
xxviii. 13; it is but reasonable,
therefore, to conjecture that the
popular, mythic Seraphim are the
serpent-like lightning. Isaiah uses
the popular form of speech quite
freely as a symbol (the ‘dragon’ in

xiv. 29 is also a symbol). Except
in the name and the supernatural
colouring, there is nothing here to
remind us of the mythic origin of
the Seraphim. Perhaps it was at
Isaiah’s suggestion that Hezekiah
put down the ‘brazen serpent’ to
which the children of Israel used
to burn incense.’ At any rate, this
reform of Hezekiah’s accounts for
our hearing no more of the Sera-
phim after this vision of Isaiah.—
The popular notion of the Seraphim
as angels is of course to be rejected.
They are not called ‘angels, and
differ widely from the angels, as
described elsewhere. They are in-
deed more like Titans than placid
Gabriels and Raphaels.—It is note-
worthy that the ‘living creatures’
of Rev. iv. 7, 8, are an original
fusion of the Cherubim of Ezekiel
with the Seraphim of Isaiah. On
these kindred forms and _ their
Oriental analogues see further in
LE ssays, vol. iii Were standing
above him] i.e., hovering, for with
two of his wings each of them flew.
Covered his face] in adora-
tion. More strictly ‘used to cover.’

8 Kept crying] Comp. Rev. iv. 8:
‘They rest not day and night, saying
Holy, holy, holy.,—— ely] Comp.
Ps.xxix.g: ‘In his palace every one
saith, Glory!’ Holiness and glory
are, in fact, correlative conceptions.
Jehovah in Himself is ‘holy,’ and
His manifestation of Himself is
‘glory.’ Nor is Jehovah only Is-
rael’s God; hence the Seraphim
add, that the fulness of the whole
earth is his glory (his glory is the
predicate). The cry of ‘ Holy’ is
uttered three times, either because
three is a favourite number of the
Hebrews (comp. Jer. vii. 4), or be-

1 See Baudissin, Studien zur semet. Religionsgeschichte (1876), no. iv.

? Encyclopedia Britannica (1876), art. ‘Cherubim' ; comp. Tiele, Vergelijkende
Geschiedenis (1872), p. 701, Friedr. Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradies ? (1881), p. 155.

3 Nehushtan, the student will remember, is not a name of contempt, but the
popular name of the image (‘men called it Nehushtan,’ i.e. ‘ copper '-image, 2 Kings

xviii, 4).

CHAP. VI.] ISAIAH. 39

earth is full of hisglory. ‘ Andthe foundations of the thresh-
olds shook at the voice of him that cried, and the house
became full of smoke. *And Isaid, Woe is me! surely Iam
undone, for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the
midst of a people of unclean lips, for the King, Jehovah
Sabaoth, mine eyes have seen. ®And there flew unto me
one of the seraphim, with a stone in his hand, which he had
taken with the tongs from off the altar. 7 And he touched
my mouth with it, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips,
and forthwith gone is thy iniquity and thy sin is forgiven.

cause it is first uttered by the two
choruses, and then taken up by the
whole body of Seraphim (so H.
Schultz, A/ttest. Theologze, first ed.,
i. 345). Of the ancient Trinitarian
interpretation, Calv. remarks, ‘Quo-
rum sententiam ego non improbo:
sed si mihi res cum hereticis esset,
mallem firmioribus testimoniis uti.’
If indeed we admit the Trinity in
this Hebrew passage, why should
we not also in the Assyrian pas-
sages referred to in Last Words (end
of vol. ii.) ?——Jehovah Sabdoth]
Specially appropriate in the mouth
of the Seraphim (see on i. 9).

* Of him that criea] i.e, of
each one who cried. Became
full of smoke] The smoke indi-
cates the coming into view of the
dark side of the self-manifesting
God, viz. His anger against sin
(Naeg.). Comp. Rev. xv. 8, where
the heavenly temple becomes full
of smoke from the glory of God im-
mediately after ‘the seven angels’
have received the ‘ golden vials full
of the wrath of God.’ Del.’s view
seems to me farfetched.

5 ¥ am undone] He is awe-
struck as he realises God’s glory
and holiness and his own weak-
ness and sin ; comp. I Sam. vi. 20,
Luke v. 8. The widow of Zarephath
is afraid of contact with Elijah
as one who could ‘call sin to re-
membrance’ before God (1 Kings
xvii, 18)———A man of unclean
lips . . . ] Comp.‘apurelip, Zeph.
iii. 9. The pure lips of the Sera-
phim painfully reminded Isaiah of
his own sins of the lips.) He may

have been conscious of no others:
these he could not but have, accord-
ing to James iii. 2, and yet his guilt
must be purified, before he could
receive a prophet’s commission
from Jehovah. He feels his guilt
enhanced by his ‘solidarity’ with his

people. For mine eyes have
seen... | Isaiah’s second motive
for fear. It is the same which is

expressed in the familiar phrase of
the primitive people, that ‘no man
can see God, and live’; comp, Ex,
XXXI1IL 20.

® One of the seraphs brings a
stone from the never-extinguished
fire of the altar of incense to purge
the lips of the predestined apostle
from their earthly dross. (Dr. Weir
quotes Ps. li. 15.) So Jeremiah
tells us that Jehovah touched his
mouth (Jer. 1. 9) as an ‘outward
and visible sign’ of his commission.
But Isaiah shows a keener sense of
his sinfulness than Jeremiah, and
consequently is purged from that
infirmity of will which afterwards
cost Jeremiah such severe struggles
(Jer. xx.). Fire is the sacramental
sign of moral purification, Matt.
iii, 11, comp. Num. xxxi. 23.——
A stone] For the heavenly altar
(Rev. viil. 3, ix. 13,) is formed on
the model of the earthly one. Ewald
rightly sees an allusion to the law
in the ‘ Book of the Covenant,’ that
altars should be constructed of
earth, or of unhewn stones (Ex. xx,
25), a law which evidently arose
in the nomadic period before tools
were common. A word for ‘altar’
in Himyaritic—szaslima—also has

49 ISAIAH. [CHAP. VI.
® And I heard the voice of Jehovah, saying, Whom shall I send,
and who will go for us? And I said, Here am I, send me.

9 And he said, Go and say to this people, Hear ye indeed,
but understand not, and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
0 Make the heart of this people fat, and its ears heavy, and
its eyes besmear, lest it should see with its eyes, and hear
with its ears, and its heart should understand, and it should
be converted and be healed. "And I said, How long,
Jehovah? And he said, Until cities be waste without in-
habitants, and houses without men, and the ground be * left a
desolation,* }?and Jehovah have removed men afar off, and
the deserted region be large in the midst of the land. "And

® So Sept., Gr.—TEXxT, be wasted to a desolation.

the meaning of ‘stone’ (Praeto-
rius).—On rendering, see crit. note.

8 And now Isaiah, though a mor-
tal, is free of the heavenly precincts,
and qualified to be sent, like his
compeers, on the royal errands.
— Who will go for us?] This
is no mere ‘plural of majesty’; an-
cient Oriental kings did not speak
of themselves in the plural number.
The picture is evidently that of Je-
hovah, ‘the King,’ in consultation
with his trusted servants (so 1 Kings
xxli. 19-22), a picture which is also
perhaps suggested in Gen. i. 26.
Comp. also Job ii. 1, xv. 8 (Q.P.B.)

® This people] Even Judah,
under certain circumstances, is ad-
dressed contemptuously as ‘this
people’; so vili, 11, xxviii. 11, 14,
XXXIX. 13, 14.

10 Make the heart. .. ] ‘ Heart’
= understanding, as Hos. vii. 11,
&c. ‘No one,’ observes Julius
Miiller, ‘ can withdraw himself from
the range and influence of God’s
revelations without altering his
moral status’ (Loctrine of Sin, ii.
412). The obduracy, therefore, is
self-caused. But as God is the first
cause (Prov. xvi. 4), He must have
‘made Israel to stray from his
ways’ (Ixiii. 17, see note). Obs. 1.
It is the nation as a whole whichis
spoken of. The phrase ‘ hardening
of the heart’ is, I think, only twice
applied to individuals in books of

the Old Testament, viz. to the Pha-
raoh of the Exodus (Ex. iv. 21, &c.)
and to Sihon, king of Heshbon
(Deut. ii. 30). Jews never have
this phrase applied to them, but
only the Jewish nation or sections
of it (e.g., Isa. vi. 9, 10, xxix. 10,
andhere). 2. This grievous act or
process has an object, or at least
a compensating benefit (v. 13). As
soon as the existing evil tendencies
have worked themselves out, the
purified ‘remnant’ shall create a
perfectly new epoch for the nation
(Duhm, Zheologie der Propheten,
160). Itseyes besmear]| Comp.
xxix. Io, xliv. 18. Sir Thomas
Roe’s chaplain mentions a son of
the Great Mogul, who had had his
eyes sealed up three years by his
father as a punishment (Burder,
Oriental Customs, i. 178).

1! Lord, howlongt|] The ques-
tion is wrung from Isaiah by his
compassion.

1? Removed] A covert reference
to the Assyrian policy of deporta-

tion.
13 n

. a tenth in it] Parallel
passage, Zech. xiii. 8,9. A single
Judgment will not be sufficient to
eradicate the evil tendencies.
As the terebinth and as the oak]
(An abrupt transition, reminding
us of ix. 1.) The ‘extermination’
is only in appearance (comp. iv. 4)3
Isaiah is not careful to file away in-

CHAP. VII] ISAIAH. 41

should there yet be a tenth in it, this shall again be ex-
terminated; as the terebinth and as the oak, of which,
after the felling, a stock remaineth, a holy seed is the stock
thereof.

CHAPTER VII.

Tus chapter forms the first part of a group of discourses, all connected
directly or indirectly with the Syro-Israelitish war referred to in the
opening verses. The latter require to be illustrated by the parallel
passages in 2 Kings xvi. 5-9 (comp. xv. 37, and 2 Chr. xxviii. 5~16).
Both of these appear to be less original than the narrative in Isaiah,
especially that of Chronicles, which many critics go so far as to reject as
absolutely unhistorical. Nor are they without excuse, not to say
justification, considering the difficulty of discriminating between the
traditions embodied by the Chronicler, and the adventitious matter due
to his predominating regard for edification. One great stumbling-block
in 2 Chr. xxviii. is the crushing defeats which it asserts to have been sus-
tained by Ahaz (vv. 5, 6), but which are not mentioned in Kings. How,
it has been plausibly asked, could Isaiah have called the two hostile
kings ‘smoking firebrands,’ if they had just inflicted such a crushing blow
on Judah? On the other hand, Dr. Caspari declares, after an elaborate
investigation of the narratives, ‘that nothing can be clearer than that the
events of 2 Chr. xxviii. 5, &c., fall between those of the two halves of
2 Kings xvi. 5@ and 4; that the author of Kings gives a report of the
beginning and the end, while the Chronicler gives a supplementary
account of that which happened in the middle of the campaign. He
shows us, in fact, how it was that such an extreme calamity as the siege
of Jerusalem became possible.’?

Into the manifold difficulties of a historical reconstruction of this
period I am not called upon to enter. I must assume, however, that the
object of the northern kings, as is generally admitted, was to compel
Judah to join a coalition against the common enemy of Syria and Pales-

consistencies. Like those evergreen
trees which, even when they are cut
down, send out new shoots from the
stump, so the ‘tenth part’ of Israel,
even when almost consumed, shall
have such a ‘stump’or ‘stock’ in
its pious remnant, the ‘seed of
holiness.’ This is the bright side of
the judgment, by which Isaiah con-
stantly relieves the general gloom
of his preaching (i. 27, iv. 3, x. 20,
xxix. 18, xxx. 18, &c.)——A holy

seed] So ‘the holy seed,’ Ezra ix.
2. ‘Holy’=dedicated to Jehovah,
with the derived meaning of in-
violable (iv. 3).—Obs. There is no
reference here to the Messiah ; but
the figure is precisely the same as
that used for the Messiah in xi. 1,
comp. x. 33. As soon as the pious
remnant of Israel is organised, a
personal stem becomes a necessary
conception (at any rate in I Isaiah).

1 Caspari, Ueber_den syrisch-ephraimitischen Krieg (Christiania, 1849), p. ror.
Compare Delitzsch, esaja, first ed., pp. 10-16; and among less conservative critics,
Ewald (History, vol. iv.), and Bertheau (Zxegetisches Handbuch on Chronicles).

42 ISAIAH. (CHAP. Vil.

tine—Assynia. Curiously enough, Azariah or Uzziah, the grandfather of
Ahaz, (or may it have been Jotham, in his father’s name?) had, according
to the Inscriptions, been a leading member of just such a coalition only
six years before (B.C. 740).?

It will be observed that chap. vii. does not claim to be the work of
Isaiah. There is also a looseness in the connection, and an occasional
feebleness of style, which make even the editorship of Isaiah difficult to
realise :—notice in particular the break between v. 16 and v. 17, and the
cumbrous style of vv. 17-25. The same looseness of connection is appa-
rent in chap. viii. Taken together with the very peculiar introduction to
chap. vii., and the cumbrousness of vii. 17-25, it makes it a very probable
conjecture that the whole section vii. 1—ix. 7 only assumed its present
form long after the original utterance of the prophecies. Perhaps when
the last editor took up the work, the manuscript authority used by him
had become partly mutilated or illegible (comp. Last Hords, vol. ii.).

In ZC. A., p. 25, I described chaps. vii. 1—ix. 7, as ‘an epitome of
the discourses delivered at this great national crisis,’ viz. the Syrian and
Israelitish invasion. This statement, however, seems to need qualifica-
tion. From viii. 17 to ix. 7 there is no allusion to the Syrian invasion ;
it is the formidable power of Assyria which fills the imagination of the
prophet. This part of the group of prophecies is evidently later than the
rest. It may be added, that at any rate chap. vii. has probably been
worked up or ‘ restored’ to the best of his ability by a comparatively late
editor, on the basis of an incomplete transcript of the original epitome.
Whether the latter was the work of Isaiah, or of one of Isaiah’s disciples
acting under his direction or at any rate in his spirit, it is, of course, im-
possible to say. To this partly ‘restored’ epitome, there appears to be
prefixed an illustrative passage from the book, or section of a book,
entitled, in 2 Chr. xxxii. 32, ‘the vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz.’? The
historical setting is a characteristic which this prophecy shares in common
with those in chap. xx. and chaps. xxxvi.-xxxix.

Dr. C. J. Bredenkamp of Greifswald, has examined current explana-
tions of vii. 1—ix. 6 in an article in Luthardt’s Zeztschrift, 1883, pp.
621-632. His exegetical method is bold, e.g. he connects ‘that go
softly’ (viii. 6) with ‘this people He denies that Isaiah expected
Immanuel to be born in the near future, because of his allusion to an
Assyrian invasion, apparently assuming that Isaiah’s doctrine of the
Messiah and his intuition of the future were already complete when he
first opened the subject in public. All very disappointing in the successor
of so brilliant, even though one-sided, a scholar as Wellhausen.

1 And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz son of Jotham,
son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin king of Aram,
1 Rezin] The Syrian king ap- Hebraist will observe, is only at-
pears to have been the soul of the tached by the VAv of association

expedition: hence the singularnum- (see crit. note), The pretender to
ber of the verbs. Pekah, as the the throne of Judah, too, has a

1 Schrader, Kedlinschriflen und Geschichtsforschung, pp. 395-421.

CHAP. VI11.] ISAIAH. 43

together with Pekah son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up
to Jerusalem to war against it (but he was not able to war
against it). ®And it was told the house of David, saying,
Aram “resteth upon Ephraim ; and his heart shook, and the
heart of his people, as the trees of the forest shake before
the wind. 3 And Jehovah said unto Isaiah, Come, go out to
meet Ahaz, thou and Shear-Yashub thy son, at the end of
the conduit of the upper pool, at the highway of the fuller’s
field; ‘and say unto him, Look that thou keep calm ; fear not,

® Hath settled (z.e. encamped), Ew., Naeg.

Syrian name (v. 6).——"went up]
The phrase has no special reference
to the elevated situation of Jerusa-
lem (Knob.), for it is used of re-
treating as well as of invading
armies (1 Kings xv. 19, 2 Kings xii.
19, Jer. xxi. 2, xxxiv. 21, xxxvii. 5,
11), See Graf, Studien und Kri-
tiken, 1854, p. 891, &c. ‘To war
against it] A term for the pro-
tracted combat which went on by
the gate of a besieged city (Judges
ix. 45, 52, 2 Sam. xi. 20) In 2
Kings xvi. 5 it is stated that Jeru-
salem had been enclosed (a differ-
ent word), with a view, that is, to
the storming of the city. But he
was not able... ] Presumably
because some bad news (such as
the approach of the Assyrians) com-
pelled him to renounce his inten-
tion. This is an anticipative remark,
like those in xx. I, xxxviil. 21; con-
sequently the circumstances related
in the following verses should come
in order of time before the last
clause of v. I.

? It was told the house of
Davia] For the expedition was
really directed against the family of
David; its expressed object (v. 6)
is not conquest—but a change of
dynasty. In 2 Kings xvi. 5, too,
there is a trace of this ; for we read
—not ‘they besieged Jerusalem ’—
but ‘they besieged Ahaz.’ As to
the ‘house of David, see on v. 13.
Resteth upon] viz. as oneallied
force rests upon another. Accord-
ing to alt. rend. the figure is taken
from the appearance of a swarm
of flies or locusts. But surely the

cause of the alarm of Ahaz was not
any encampment, but the confeder-
acy.— Ephraim] The popular
name for the kingdom of Israel.

5 Go out] Isaiah lived in the
middle (lower) city, 2 Kings xx. 4
(Heb. text). He was now to meet
Ahazat the end of the city. By his
social rank (probably), as well as
by his position as a prophet, he
could venture to address Ahaz un-
bidden. Comp. on xxxvii. 2.
Shear-Yashub] i.e, A remnant
shall return (comp. x. 22). An in-
stance of the way in which Isaiah
and his family were ‘for signs and
for omens’ (viii. 18). According to
Ewald, the meaning of the name
formed the subject of a revelation,
now lost, which originally preceded
that concerning Immanuel. It
seems safer to assume that Shear-
Yashub went as a witness, either to
chronicle events in his memory, or
for his own sake as a means of reli-
gious education. The conduit
of the upper pool] Ahaz had pro-
bably gone hither, like Hezekiah,
on a similar occasion, ‘to stop the
waters of the fountains without the
city’ (2 Chr. xxxii. 3). The ‘upper
pool’ may be the Birket-el-Mamilla
= ‘the dragon’s well’ of Neh. ii.
13 it seems to correspond to the
‘lower pool’ of xxii. 9. See, how-
ever, Capt. Warren, in Ac¢heneum,
Feb. 6, 1875.

* Smoking] i.e, almost burnt
out.——The son of Remaliah]
Indicating the mean origin of the
upstart Pekah: comp. ‘the son of
Kish,’ 1 Sam. x. 11, ‘the son of Jesse,

44 ISAIAH. (CHAP. VII.

neither let thine heart be soft, because of these two stumps
of smoking firebrands, even for the burning anger of Rezin
and Aram, and the son of Remaliah. * Because Aram hath
purposed evil against thee (with) Ephraim and the son of
Remaliah, saying, “Let us go up against Judah and * distress
it,) and break through and win it for ourselves, and let us
appoint king in the midst of it the son of Tabel: 7 thus saith
the Lord, Jehovah, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to
pass. ®For the head of Aram is Damascus, and the head of
Damascus is Rezin,* 9and the head of Ephraim is Samaria,
> So Ges. (conj.).—Alarm, Ew., Del., Naeg. (text).

¢ TExT inserts, And within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken that
it be nota people. (Lowth transfers these words to the end of vw 9.)

xx. 30. It is rather singular that the rulers of Syria and Israel are

the same form of expression occurs
five times in the list of Solomon’s
twelve provincial officers for supply-
ing the royal tables (1 Kings iv.
8-19).

® Break through] The same
word is used with reference to the
fortified towns or passes command-
ing the entrance into a country, 2
Chr. xxi. 17 (in Hiphil), xxxii. 1 (with
the same ‘pregnant construction’
as here, but in Kal). The son
of Tabel] The way in which this
person is mentioned suggests that
he was an obscure adventurer, like
Pekah (2 Kings xv. 25), and his
name (=‘ good (is) God’ in Ara-
maic; comp. Tabrimmon) _indi-
cates that he was a Syrian. The
name occurs again among the Ara-
maic- speaking ‘ people of the land,
after the exile (Ezra iv. 7), but not,
as Oppert and Schrader thought,
in Assyrian inscriptions of this
period, since Idibil and Dibil (ie.
Abdeel) are better readings (Friedr.
Del.).

8-9 For the head of Aram is
Damascus... ] The chief cities
of Syria and Israel are Damascus
and Samaria :—the chief city of
Judah is Jerusalem. Those two
powers which the prophet regards
as essentially profane or secular
and unconnected with Jehovah, are
and shall continue to be confined
within their allotted range. So, too,

Rezin and Pekah—puny mortals,
whereas (it is implied) the true
king of Judah is Jehovah. But in
the very middle of this symmetrical
structure of parallelism we are sur-
prised by a precise chronological
statement, not strictly germane to
the subject, and unparalleled in its
range, either in the acknowledged
prophecies of Isaiah or in the works
of Isaiah’s contemporaries. There
is nothing (except a superstitious
belief in the unalterableness of the
Biblical texts) to prevent us from
holding that some pious student
and editor of Isaiah inserted the
words, honestly believing that Isaiah
must or might have foreknown the
date of the event referred to. He
knew his author well, for the dis-
puted clause is in perfect accord-
ance with the style of Isaiah (comp.
xxl. 16, xvi. 14, xvii. 1). But under
the egis of Isaiah he addressed
his own contemporaries, and the
lesson he wished them to learn was
this, that if Judah did not cast aside
all human confidences, and _ rely
exclusively on Jehovah, it would
share the fate of the sister-king-
dom.—And now as to the date fixed
in this prediction. According to
the most ancient theory (Jerome,
Euseb., A.E.), it is the captivity of
Tiglath-Pileser, or Sargon, which
is referred to;—against this, see
Pusey, JA//nor Prophets, i. 148.

CHAP. VIL]

ISAIAH. 45

and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah.... If ye

have no faith, verily ye shall not have continuance.

0 And

Jehovah spoke further to Ahaz, saying, '! Ask thee a sign of
Jehovah thy God, 4deep unto Shedl or high unto heaven.‘

4 So the Greek versions (but not Sept.), Vulg., Ew., Del.—Ask something in the

depth, or in the height above, Ges., Weir, Naeg.
See Ewald, Lehrbuch d. h. S., § 93, 3-)

cases,

Another old view is that of Arch-
bishop Usher, followed by Hengst.,
that the reference is to the trans-
plantation of a foreign population
to Samaria in the days of Esar-
haddon (Ezra iv. 2). Bosanquet’s
confirmation of this view from As-
syriology (Smith’s Assurbanipal,
p. 363) seemed at first almost de-
cisive ; and Schrader, after him,
argued, on the same grounds, that
even after 722 Samaria was ‘ quite
a respectable power, with which
the Assyrian kings had to reckon’
(Jahrbiicher f. prot. Theologie, i.
333), so that the kingdom was not
thoroughly ‘broken’ by Sargon’s
capture of Samaria. Unfortunately,
this has been upset by the discovery
that the true reading of the name
on which the above view depended
was, not Usimuruna (Samaria), but
Samsi-muruna ; comp. Halévy,
Revue des études jutves, No. 3, p-
12, Friedr. Del., Paradies, p. 287.
Archbishop Usher's explanation,
however, is still the most reason-
able one. The mixture of races in
Samaria was the final blow to the
existence of the nation, and if we
reckon 65 years from 736 B.C., as-
sumed as the date of Isaiah’s meet-
ing with Ahaz, we come to 671,
which may very well have been the
year when Samaria was finally
‘broken.’ Ezra iv. 2 ascribes the
blow to Esar-haddon, but uv. Io
speaks of Asnapper, which is pro-
bably a corruption (see crit. note)
of Assurbanipal, the name of Esar-
haddon’s son and successor, who
was also his co-regent in his life-
time. Xf ye haveno faith... ]
Or, if ye hold not fast, verily ye
shall not stand fast (rendering in
I. C. A.). There is a designed as-
sonance between the clauses; we

(The read, is the same in both

find it again in 2 Chr. xx. 20 (see
Hebr.) ; also Hab. ii. 4.

10 and Jehovah spoke further
. .. ] The form of the phrase is
peculiar, and only occurs elsewhere
in viii. 5. Here, however, it is
doubly remarkable, because it is
not a direct communication from
Jehovah to Ahaz which follows, but
a mediate one through the prophet.
In spite of Delitzsch’s deep remark
pointing to the prophet’s conscious-
ness of Jehovah, the most natural
view, considering the general cha-
racter of the chapter, seems to me
that ‘Jehovah’ is an error either of
the scribe or of the editor of the
section. The following words were
perhaps spoken at a different time
and place from vv. 4-9.

1 Ask thee a sign] It is clear
that something had passed between
Isaiah and Ahaz, through our igno-
ranceof which wecannot thoroughly
understand the sequel. Very prob-
ably it had some reference to the
plan of an embassy to Assyria (2
Kings xvi. 7), already maturing in
the royal mind. Chronology is not
opposed to this view, for it is only
stated in vv. 2, 5, that a confederacy
had been formed, not that the hos-
tile armies had as yet set foot on
the soil of Judah. We may well
suppose that Isaiah was as unfa-
vourable to an Assyrian as he was
afterwards to an Egyptian alliance,
and that he did all in his power to
dissuade or deter the king from it.
In vv. 17-25 his language is de-
terrent ; in the lost passage which
should precede v. 11 it was pro-
bably of a persuasive character.
‘ Trust in Jehovah,’ the prophet may
have said, ‘and your highest hopes
will be surpassed.’ And now he
continues, ‘ Ask thee a sign of this.

46

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. VII.

2 But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I put Jehovah to

the test.

13. And he said, Hear, I pray you, O house of

David; is it too little for you to weary men, that ye will

What sort of sign did Isaiah mean
on this occasion ? Deep unto
She6l or high unto heaven] i.c.,
say some, Isaiah will either call up
from the dead the shade of some
mighty prophet or hero—a Samuel
or a ]David—or ‘ darken the sun at
midday’ (comp. the wonder of the
sundial, xxxviii. 8). To the second
alternative, no strong objection can
be taken, but the first is open to
criticism. It is true that Isaiah
must have believed in Jehovah’s
lordship over Sheol (1 Sam. ii. 6),
and true that there would be a cer-
tain fitness in the prophet’s availing
himself of the presumed fondness
of the king for necromancy. On
the other hand, (1) it seems probable
that an offer of this kind would have
been expressed more distinctly, and
(2) we find Isaiah, at the very same
period, denouncing necromantic
practices in the strongest manner
(viii. 19). It is safer, therefore, to
take both expressions, ‘deep unto
Sheol’ and ‘ high unto heaven’ me-
taphorically, comparing lvii. 9 (end),
and still better Job xi. 7, 8 :—

Canst thou find out the depth of Elohim?
Or canst thou find out the end of Shad-

dai?
Heights of heaven! what canst thou do?
Deeper than Shedl! what canst thou
know?

Nothing is impossible to Jehovah ;
therefore Ahaz has perfect freedom
of choice, provided that he asks in
reverence. He may ask, for in-
stance, for the restoration of some
lost child from the dead, or for any
seemingly simpler ‘ providential
arrangement’ (comp. 1 Sam. x, 7),
but not for anything inconsistent
with, or capable of being turned
against, the true religion. Contrast,
in passing, the Oldand New Testa-
ments in their estimate of ‘ signs.’
Jehovah thy God] Ahaz was
a genuine worshipper of Jehovah,
but also of ‘other gods beside’
him, His name in full appears to

have been Jehoahaz (Yahukhazi in
Tiglath-Pileser I1.’s great Inscrip-
tion). This is not inconsistent
with the expression ‘my God’ in
uv. 13 (see note).

2 But Ahaz said... ] Ahazis
incredulous. No doubt he has pro-
phets of his own, in whose word he
places more confidence than in that
of Isaiah. He desires, therefore,
to break off the conference under
the hypocritical pretext of not wish-
ing to ‘test Jehovah’ (a sin spring-
ing from unbelief, Ex. xvii. 7, Deut.
vi. 16).

13 and he said] Here again the
conjecture is a probable one that
the following discourse was spoken
at a fresh time and place. It is
highly noteworthy that the pro-
phecy is first of all directed to the
house of David, not to Ahaz alone.
The house of David means all the
various branches of the royal family,
and ought strictly to include the
‘house of Nathan’ (Zech. xii. 12,
comp. Luke iii. 27, 31). It would
seem that this princely order was
almost as numerous a body in Judah
as it was, according to Brugsch, in
Egypt, and that it was able to exer-
cise a decisive political influence.
On the former point, see /. C. A., p.
88 (top), and comp. Zeph. i. 8; on
the latter, see three passages in
Jeremiah, where the members of
the royal family receive the desig-
nation ‘kings of Judah’ (xvii. 20,
Hitz., xix. 3, xxv. 18), just as the
queen-mother is called ‘the mis-
tress’ (Jer. xiii. 18, 1 Kings xv,
13, 2 Kings x. 13). They appear
to have monopolised the judicial
function (see Jer. xxi. 11, 12), so
that the people had frequent op-
portunities of testing their fitness
for the crown. Hence on at least
one occasion the unpopularity of
the eldest son of the king led to
his being excluded from the succes-
sion by ‘the people of the land’
(2 Kings xxiii. 30; comp, vv. 31,

CHAP. VI1.]

also weary my God?

ISATAH.

47

“4 Therefore Jehovah himself shall

appoint you a sign; behold, *the young woman® is with

© So Hitzig, R. Williams, Naeg., and (in effect) Ges.
The virgin, Weir, observing, ‘ But the Hebr., strictly speaking, does not
‘A young woman,’ however, is also admissible, if Ewald

Ew., Del. in,
correspond to our ‘ virgin.’

The maiden (fungfrau),

be right in regarding the article as that of species (like ‘the lion’).

36). In fact, the queen-mother?
and the royal princes formed a nu-
merous and influential upper caste,
which only a king of unusual force
of character, like Hezekiah or Jo-
siah, could venture, and that rather
timidly, to oppose. For instances
of high officials belonging to the
royal family, see 1 Kings xxii. 26,
2 Kings xxv. 25, 2 Chr. xxvili. 7,
Jer. xxxviii. 6. See further in Last
Words, vol. ii. (Graf, on Jer. xxi.
11, would extend the meaning of
the term ‘house of David’ to all
who enjoyed any office or dignity
under the crown, comparing our
phrase ‘the court.’ Similarly Hitz.
But this is very unnatural, and the
analogy of Egypt is rather against
it. My Goa] Yet in vw. Io
Isaiah had said ‘thy God. True,
but Ahaz had forfeited his religious
rights by his unbelief. So in some
threatening prophecies (e.g. vi. 10)
‘my people’ becomes ‘this people.’

“4 Phe Lord himself] Whom
ye reject. Behold] A forewarn-
ing of a great event.——The young
woman] The prophet sees the
woman selected by Jehovah with
the inner eye. We need not, how-
ever, suppose that he had any other
reason for mentioning her than to
introduce the naming of the child
(comp. Luke i. 60).

The rendering adopted has been
objected to from an English and
from a Hebrew point of view.
But 1, it is that of a synonymous
word in the A.V. of Am. ii. 7

text determines otherwise, we are
precluded from going beyond the
strict etymological meaning of the
word, which is simply ‘a woman
of mature age.” See crit. note.—
As to the details of the inter-
pretation, opinions are and always
will be divided. There is no ex-
planation which does not require
us to make some assumption not
directly sanctioned by the text.
The only question is, Which as-
sumption is most in harmony with
Isaiah’s early prophecies? The
first theory (2) which presents itself
is that started by Rashi and A.E.,
and adopted by Ges., Hitz., Knob.,
that a young woman actually
present, or at any rate alive, is
referred to, viz. Isaiah’s wife. In
favour of this, one may urge the
significance of the names of other
sons of Isaiah (vii. 3, viii. 3, comp.
18). ‘But how can Isaiah have
called his wife by a name so liable
to be misunderstood as ‘almah,
especially as in the very next
chapter he gives her what was
probably her recognised title, ‘the
prophetess’ (viii. 3)? It can hardly
be that this objection is adequately
met by the conjecture that Isaiah
had married a second wife who
was at that time giving birth to a
son (Ges., Dr. S. Davidson). There
is also (0) the theory of Hofmann,
Kohler, and Dr. Weir, that ‘the
young woman’=the people of Is-
rael, as the bride of Jehovah (comp.
liv. 5, Ezek. xvi, Hos. ii. 16, 19,

(margin), and 2, unless the con- 20, Zeph. iii. 17). Against this it

1 The high rank of the queen-mother seems to be a relic of the primitive age in
which the relationship of the mother was of such vast importance (Accadians, Etrus-
cans, Finns, &c.), The political value of the position is strikingly shown in the
authority usurped for six years in Judah by the bold Athaliah, The mention of the
mothers of the kings seems connected with their high rank in the social system as
queen-mothers, It is singular enough that Ahaz is one of the only two kings of Judah
whose mothers are not mentioned in the historical books. Perhaps his mother died
before arriving at the dignity of queen-mother,—Comp, also Mic. vii. 6 (‘against her
mother-in-law’).

48

ISAIAH.

(CHAP. VIR.

child and shall bring forth a son, and shall call his name

may be urged: 1. that this figure
of speech is reserved for the higher
style of prophecy; 2. that the
advocates of the theory are not
able to agree on the meaning of
the birthofthe child. Hofmann says
the child is the regenerate people ;
Dr. Weir that child-birth is simply
an allegory of deliverance from
danger (though the child, he in-
consistently says, is also a type of
the Messiah). Others (c) take the
clause as to the birth of the son
hypothetically. Thus Roorda, as
before him substantially Eichhorn,
explains it to mean, ‘Any young
woman who is at this time with
child may call her son by the name
Immanuel,’ as a memorial of the
foretold deliverance (Ovzentalia,
1840, pp. 129, 130). So Kuenen
and Prof. Robertson Smith (see
Last Words, vol. ii.). But thus we
get no sign at all, whether of
promise or of threatening—not to
mention the appeal to Immanuel
as an individual in vill. 8. There
remains! the theory (d@) that the
“young woman’ is the mother of
the Messiah, whose advent, as
Ewald has well pointed out, was
expected by Isaiah to synchronise
with the Assyrian invasion (see
chaps. ix. xi.). The touch of pas-
sion, to which Sir E. Strachey
has already called attention in the
opening words (Hebrew Politics,
p. 104), suggests that there was
something extraordinary in the child
beyond such external peculiarities
as name and food. There is, be-
sides, a prophecy of Isaiah’s con-
temporary, Micah (v. 3-5), which
may perhaps be held to allude to
the two Isaianic prophecies of God-
with-us and Wonder- Counsellor :—

‘Therefore will he (Jehovah) give
them up, until a travailing woman
hath brought forth, and (until) the
remnant of his brethren return unto
the children of Israel; and he (the
Messiah) shall stand, and shall

shepherd in the strength of Jeho-
vah, &c. ; for then shall he be great
unto the ends of the earth.’

{t is true that there is no mention
of Immanuel’s being of Davidic ori-
gin, but strictly speaking there is
no mention of the Davidic origin of
the Messiah even in chap. ix. At
any rate, there is nothing here to
exclude such an ancestry; and
Justin Martyr (Dial. c. Tryph. 68)
long ago argued in favour of it from
the prophecy being addressed to
the ‘house of David.’ It is true,
again, that nothing is said of the
child Immanuel’s growing up to be
a king and a deliverer. But this
only confirms the view, already
adopted as probable, that chap. vil.
consists of an incomplete summary
of Isaianic discourses ; or again (as
in J. C. A., p. 31) we may regard
this prophecy as the first rough
sketch of the Messianic doctrine, to
be filled up on subsequent oppor-
tunities. Why indeed should we
expect a single prophecy (especially
if only handed down from notes)
to be as complete as an article in
a dictionary ?>—The two really im-
portant objections are these: 1. Is
it conceivable that Isaiah expected
the Messiah to pass through the
period of exile predicted in vi. 11-13,
before he restored the kingdom to
the regenerate remnant of Israel ?
The answer is that, on grounds
external to this prophecy, the con-
cluding portion of chap. vi. is pro-
bably the latest portion of the group
formed by chapters vi.-ix.7; whereas
the prophecies in chap, vii. are
probably the earliest, and in many
respects the least altered, of the
group. When the prophecy of Im-
manuel was delivered, Isaiah could
not have had such a full conception
of the events preceding the appear-
ance of the Messiah as he attained
afterwards. And 2. Would the
birth of a child from an unnamed
and unknown woman be recognised

1 The theory that Immanuel= Hezekiah was long ago disproved by the remark of
Jerome, that Hezekiah must have been at least nine years old when this prophecy was

delivered (comp. 2 Kings xvi. 2, xviii. 2).

CHAP. VII.] ISAIAH. 49

Immanuel. %Milk-curd and honey shall he eat, ‘when he
shall‘ know how to reject the evil and choose the good.
16 For before the boy shall know how to reject the evil and
choose the good, the land shall become deserted, at whose
two kings thou fearest horribly. ‘7 Jehovah shall bring upon

€ That he may, Pesh., Vulg., Kay.

as a sign by Ahaz? The answer is,
1. that this was unimportant to
Isaiah. Ahaz and his house were
judicially hardened, and their un-
belief on this occasion was a fresh
degree in the hardening (comp. xxix.
Io, 11). The prophecy was really
addressed to those who could re-
ceive it, such as Isaiah’s disciples
(comp. viii. 16). And, 2. that the
obscurity of the mother of Imma-
nuel was part of the punishment
which must, from the context, have
been included in the prophecy. It
was neither Ahaz himself, nor ason
of Ahaz, who was the destined de-
liverer of God’s people, but the child
of a nameless and obscure mother
(Del.). Is with child] So we
should render, and not ‘shall be
with child, in view of the parallel
passage, Gen. xvi. 11 (Judg. xiii. 5,
7 is doubtful), and of vv. 15, 16.——
Immanuel] i.e., God (is) with us,
or, on our side; compare Ittiel.
This symbolic name isa part of the
sign. The meaning is determined
by viii. Io.

15 WEilk-curd and honey shall
he eat] These are not mentioned,
as we should have expected, as
delicacies,' but to imply privation
(this is clear from v. 22). For a lad
arrived at years of discretion (see
next note) to have no other food
indicated that ‘the land of Imma-
nuel’ had been brought very low.
Obs., this particular detail would
be true of a multitude of other
Hebrew children, which shows that
it can only form a subordinate part
of the ‘sign.’——To reject the evil
and choose the good] A fuller

phrase for ‘ to discern between good
and evil. Hitz. explains it of
pleasant and unpleasant food (as
2 Sam. xix. 35), but most critics
take it in a moral sense (as Gen.
ii. 9, Deut. i. 39, 1 Kings iii. 9).
The second view will throw the pe-
riod named in the next verse rather
more forward than the first, and
as the circumstance of eating milk
and honey is to be a ‘sign,’ this
view seems the preferable one.

'° For before ...] A some-
what vague definition, which makes
it all the more unlikely that Isaiah
himself should have written v. 8 d.
Hitz.’s view would fix the term at
the end of the second year, for a
Jewish child was weaned in his
third (2 Macc. vii. 27.) De-
serted shall the land become] i.e.,
the people of Syria and (N.) Israel
shall be carried captive by the
Assyrians. Comp. 2 Kings xv. 29,
xvi. 9, and Smith’s The Assyrian
Canon, pp. 121-125.

7 The abruptness of the transi-
tion is remarkable, and, taken to-
gether with the cumbrous style of
the sequel, confirms the theory that
chap. vii. is based on incomplete,
though authentic, notes. We are
now introduced to a dark side in
the advent of Immanuel. Had
Jehovah ‘found faith’ in Israel’s
rulers and representatives, Imma~
nuel would have been simply a sign
of promise ; as it is, he is also a
sign of threatening. The Syrians
and Israelites shall indeed be re-
moved, but shall be succeeded by a
worse foe than Judah had ever had
before, ‘the king of Assyria.’ It is

1 They are asked for as such in an Assyrian prayer for the king translated both by
Lenormant and Friedr. Del. ; dispa #himita (=ANON\ Wad) Zhigalli, ‘honey and

curdled milk in canals,) W. A. /. iv. 18, 3, 1

. 29, 30. With which comp. Birch,

L-gypt, p. 28, ‘ Neferka-ra, in whose time the Nile is said to have flowed with milk and

honey.
VOL. I.

E

50 ISAIAH. [CHAP. VII.
thee and upon thy people, and upon thy father’s house, days
such as have not come since the day of Ephraim’s departing
from Judah, [* the king of Assyria.£] '* And it shall come to
pass that in that day Jehovah shall hiss to the flies at the
end of the Nile-arms of Egypt, and to the bees in the land
of Assyria, and they shall all of them come and settle on
the steeply walled valleys of the torrents, and on the rents
of the cliffs, and on all the thorn-bushes, and on all the pas-
tures. ®°In that day shall the Lord shave with the razor
that is hired on the banks of the River [* with the king of
Assyria *] the head and the hair of the feet, and the beard
also it shall sweep away. 7” And it shall come to pass in that
day that a man shall nourish a young cow and two sheep ;
& Omitted as interpolation by Ges., Hitz,

probable enough that this prophecy
only confirmed Ahaz in his resolu-
tion of sending an embassy to As-
syria. He may have hoped thus
to render the fulfilment of the pro-
phecy impossible. Departing
Obs. the deep impression produce

by the severance of the northern
tribes. [Hitz. and Knobel omit the
last words as a gloss, as also in v.
20 and in viii. 7. Ew. and Del.
retain them, but without offering
any solid reason. Surely they fit
in here very badly, and mar the
effect of the revelation in v. 18.
Such ultra-distinctness is just the
manner of the interpolators.]

18 According to Ewald, a long
piece has fallen out between vv. 17
and 18, relating how Isaiah left the
king, and went home, and explained
his intuitions of the future, and the
truths to which Ahaz would not
listen, in the circle of his disciples.
Yet, if v. 15 was spoken to Ahaz
(which Ew. allows), must not v. 22
have been so too, for without it
v. 15 is unintelligible? That some-
thing, however, has been lost with
regard to Immanuel seems highly
probable-——Shall hiss to the
flies... Isaiah had already
said (v. 26) that Jehovah would hiss
to ‘the distant nations,’ with a de-
scription which precisely fits the
Assyrians. He now refers to them
and to Egypt by name, and adds

that the two great rivals shall come
to acollision in Judah. There is
nothing to indicate that the inter-
vention of Egypt was out of regard
to Rezin and Pekah, as Knob. and
Kuenen suppose. It is rather a
subsequent phase of the judgment
upon Judah.—The Egyptians are
compared to the swarms of venom-
ous flies which infest the region
of the Nile (see on xviii. 1), the
Assyrians to the bees of their na-
tive woods and mountains (comp.
Deut. i. 44, Ps. cxviii, 12),——
At the end... ] ie, in the
whole extent of country watered
by the Nile and its arms ; comp.
Ivi. 11, Gen. xix. 4, xlvii. 2 (Hebr.).

18 On the steeply walled val-
leys...] A faithful picture of
the scenery of Judah.

20 with the hired razor] An
allusion to the treaty of Ahaz with
Assyria. Tiglath-Pileser was hired
in one sense by Ahaz, in another
by Jehovah (comp. x. 5). If chap.
vii. be a summary of various pro-
phecies, this will probably be a
somewhat later insertion.——on
the banks... ] Assyria being
the ruling power on both sides of
the Euphrates. The head ...
the beard] For Judah has been
stripped of her clothing, her de-
fences ; comp. i. 6.

*1.22 Obs. the increasing awk-
wardness of the style, so unlike

CHAP. VIII] ISAIAH. 5!
#2 and (yet) it shall come to pass that because of the abun-
dance of milk which he shall get, he shall eat milk-curd, for
milk-curd and honey shall everyone eat who is left within
the land. * And it shall come to pass in that day that every
place shall be, where there used to be a thousand vines at a
thousand pieces of silver—for thorns and briars shall it be ;
24 with arrows and with bow shall men come thither, for all

the land shall become thorns and briars.

2% And as for all

the mountains which used to be hoed, "thou shalt keep aloof

from them in fear of thorns and briars®:

and it shall bea

place for letting loose oxen, and for sheep to trample.

h Thither will the fear of thorns and thistles not come, Vitr., Ew., Weir, Rodwell.

Isaiah.—Cornfields and vineyards
having been destroyed, there will
be a superabundance of pasture-
land, and the few survivors will
have to subsist on sour milk and
natural honey. Two on

‘Two’ is feminine. And yet
Even with these few cattle.

23 @ thousand vines... ] This
reminds us of the thousand shekels
paid yearly for a vineyard, as arent
to Solomon (Cant. viil, 11). Here,
however, the thousand shekels
(=150/.) are the purchase-money.

24 with arrows ... ] Onlythe
hunter will venture to go thither.

°° As for all the mountains]
Isaiah is thinking of the vineyards
(comp. v. 6), which ‘are generally
planted on the sides of mountains,
often climbing, by successive ter-
races quite to the summit’ (Thom-
son). Thou shalt keep aloof |
... Lit., ‘thou shalt not enter there,
&c. ‘Not enter’ is a compound
expression = ‘keep aloof from.’ See
crit. note,

CHAPTER VIII.

1 And Jehovah said unto me, Take thee a large tablet, and
write thereon with a common pen, Concerning Maher-shalal-

1-4 © Maher-shalal-hash-baz ;’ a
twofold sign of the Assyrian inter-
vention.

) a large tablet] i.e., probably
of wood polished with wax (same
word for metal mirrors in iil. 23).
‘Large,’ for it was to be set up in
public. Comp. xxx. 8.— With a
common pen] i.e., in large cha-
racters such as the common man
can easily read (comp. Hab. ii. 2) ;
they are opposed to the smaller,
more cursive characters, such as
only a ‘learned man’ can read (xxix.
11). Comp. on x. 19. Concern-

ing ...] Lit,to... The form
reminds us of the legends on seals,
To—i.e., belonging to—such and
such a person. The context, how-
ever, forbids such an explanation
here. It is best to take the inscrip-
tion as the heading or title of an as
yet unwritten chapter of prophecy.
In one sense, of course, the heading
was itself a prediction—it pointed
to a child, Maher-shalal-hash-baz,
soon to be born. It would, of course,
powerfully excite curiosity. As to
the name itself, see on fourth verse.

E2

52 ISAIAH.

[CHAP. VIII.

hash-baz ; and * take for me, as credible witnesses, Uriah the

priest, and Zechariah son of Jeberechiah.
the prophetess, and she conceived, and bore a son.

3 And I went near
4 And

Jehovah said unto me, Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz ;
for before the boy shall know how to cry, My father, and My
mother, men shall carry the riches of Damascus and the spoil
of Samaria before the king of Assyria.

5 And Jehovah spoke still further unto me, saying, ® For-

® So Sept., Pesh., Targ., Hitz.

? fake forme... ] ‘Forme,’
because the prophecy was Jeho-
vah’s; Isaiah was but an instru-
ment. ‘ Witnesses,’ viz., to the people
at the fulfilment of the prophecy
that it was no forgery. Uriah may
be the high-priest mentioned so
unfavourably in 2 Kings xvi. 10, 11 5
this, however, is not certain, still
less certain is Bertholdt’s and
Bleek’s identification of Zechariah
with the author of the prophecy in
Zech. ix.-xi.

3 A living tablet, instead of the
dead one. —— The prophetess ]i.e.,
the prophet’s wife. The same title
of courtesy was given to Ayesha,
Mohammed’s third wife, on account
of her influence with her husband
even in matters of religion. So
too the wives of kings are called
‘queens’ and ‘ princesses’ (xlix. 23,
1 Kings xi. 3, Cant. vi. 8), and so
in the Mishna the priest’s wife is
called ‘ priestess’ (kehant?d).

4 wraher-shalal-hash-baz] i.e.,
probably ‘Swift (swiftly cometh)
spoil, speedy (speedily cometh)
prey. Imitated by Goethe, in his
Habebald—Eilebeute (Fazs¢, act
iv. sc. 3). It has been doubted
whether the child can actually have
borne such a name, but the analo-
gies of Shear-Yashub, of the com-
pound religious names in 1 Chr. iii.
20, iv. 3, xxv. 4, Ezra viii. 4, and
of the names of the Assyrian kings,
may dispel the doubt. It might
of course have been shortened in
every-day use, as Abijah was short-
ened into Abi, Jehoahaz into Ahaz,
&c. — The prediction of Maher-
shalal-hash-baz is not invested with

TeExtT, I will take.

such solemnity as that of Immanuel.
But the two are in several respects
allied. In both the birth of a child
is the pledge of deliverance. In
both the arrival of the child at a
certain age is the signal for the ful-
filment of the prophecy. Both, too,
refer to the same event. True, a
child can say Father and Mother
before it can clearly discern between
good and evil. But then the date
of the latter prophecy must be
placed at least half a year later
than that of vii. 14-16, on account
of v. 3. In an inferior degree,
therefore, the birth of Maher-shalal-
hash-baz may be called a ‘sign’
(comp. viii. 18).

® This people] The phrase is
most commonly applied to Judah
(e.g., V1. 10, xxviii. 14, xxix. 13, Jer.
Vill. 5, xiii. 10), but in ix. 15 (16) is
used of Israel, and in Jer. xxxiii. 24
it is even applied to the heathen
neighbours of the Jews. We are
therefore by no means shut up to
the view of Ewald (entirely incon-
sistent with vii. 2), that most of
the population of Jerusalem were
in favour of the pretender Ben-
Tabel (vii. 6), and wished well to
the invading army. It is much more
natural to suppose, with De Dieu,
that ‘this people’ means N. Israel,
Judah being first mentioned in v. 8.
There is the same transition from
Israel to Judah in ix. 8—x. 4 and
XXvili. 1-6, Hath rejected the
waters of Shiloah] Comp. Hos. i. 2
6. To ‘ reject’ in a religious sense =
to apostatise from (comp. Jer. xvii
13). But why ‘the waters of Shi-
loah’? For this reason. The pro-

CHAP. VIII]

ISATAH.

53

asmuch as this people hath rejected the waters of Shiloah
which flow softly, and rejoice with Rezin and the son of
Remaliah, 7 therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth upon them
the waters of the river, mighty and great, [*the king of Assyria
and all his glory*:] and it shall mount over all its channels,
and go over all its banks,’ ®and shall sweep along into Judah,

b Despair because of, Hitz., Reuss.
¢ Omitted as interpolation by Ges., Hitz.

phets gloried in Jerusalem’s not
possessing large streams, as means
of defence. They knew that Jeho-
vah would supply the place of
‘rivers and canals’ (xxxiii. 21), and
be like a stream, whose arms ‘make
glad the city of God’ (Ps. xlvi. 4).
The brook of Shiloah, therefore,
which flowed past Zion and Moriah,
became a type of the gracious God
enthroned inthetemple. But since
the Davidic dynasty alone had
Jehovah’s sanction (comp. Hos. iii.
5), the phrase is also a figure for
the mild government of the Davidic
family. Which flow softly]
Dr. Neubauer supposes that Ahaz
had made a conduit for the more
rapid passage of the waters of Shi-
loah, and that the people ironically
said of them that they still went
but softly. The first part of the
conjecture has a basis in the Tal-
mudic passage (Lrachin 10 6)
quoted by Delitzsch ad Zoc., but it
is by no means necessary to explain
Isaiah’s expression. Soft-flowing
waters are a natural emblem of
humiliation ; comp. with Ges., Virg.
én, viii. 726, ‘Euphrates ibat jam
mollior undis.’ Rejoice (in
union) with Rezin and the son of
Ramaliah] The peculiar form of
the phrase is determined by the
wish for an alliteration—(ma’as in
the first clause, z@sds in the second).
The whole passage refers primarily
to Israel, whose fault was rejecting
Jehovah, the true king of Israel,
and cleaving to Rezin and Pekah
as their champions against Assyria.
But this was also in part the fault
of Judah. The latter, of course,
rejected Rezin, but was far (to
judge from the prophecies of Isaiah)

from joyful attachment to Jehovah.
Hence the punishment fell on ‘both
the houses of Israel’ (viii. 14).
Instead of the beneficent overflow
of the ‘living waters’ (Jer. xvii. 13,
Ezek. xlvii. 1-12), the faithless land
shall be flooded with the cruel
soldiery of Assyria. But there is
a difference in the fate of the two
countries. Israel is swept away by
the stream and absorbed ; Judah,
through Immanuel’s help, emerges
safely from the torrent.

7 Upon them] i.e., upon the
Israelites of the north. The image
is based upon the annual inunda-

tions of the Euphrates. Comp.
Jer. xlvii. 2.
8 and shall sweep along... |

-Judah shall only escape for a time.

He shall be overtaken by the tor-
rent, and barely keep his head
above the water (xxx. 28). Masses
of water branching off, like wings,
from the main current, shall cover
the utmost extremities of the land.
But Assyria shall not ultimately
prevail. The safety of Judah is
secured, for its real though invisible
lord is Immanuel, who shall emerge
out of his obscurity, with super-
naturally matured powers, when
the time shall have come (comp. vii.
14).——O Immanuel!] An ejacu-
latory prayer for the Deliverer’s
advent.—The not unpleasing con-
fusion of metaphors in v. 8 may be
paralleled from Wordsworth :—

So shall its waters from the heaven sup-
plied

Brood o’er the long-parched lands with
Nile-like wings,

Dr. C. Taylor thinks the fate of

1 Descriptive Sketches, near the end.

54 ISAIAII. [CHAP. VIII.

shall overflow and pass over, reaching even to the neck, and
the stretching out of its wings shall fill the breadth of thy land,
O Immanuel! 2%4Take knowledge,’ O ye peoples,* and give
ear, all ye distances of the earth: gird yourselves, but ye
shall break down; gird yourselves, but ye shall break down ;
10 devise a device, but it shall come to nought: speak a word,
but it shall not stand, for, ‘ With us is God. '! For thus said
Jehovah unto me, with a strong pressure of the Hand, and
warned me not to walk in the way of this people, saying,
12¢Ve shall not call everything a ‘holy thing‘ which this

4 So Sept., Lowth, Gritz. Text, Be enraged.
e Text inserts, but ye shall break down.

f So Secker, Kr., Gr., La.

the Assyrians is described in vv.
21, 22 (see notes).

® At the thought of Immanuel,
the prophet raises his tone. He
challenges the combined nations,
whether near as the Syrians and
Israelites, or distant as the Assy-
rians, and announces their over-
throw. Gird yourselves] With
your belt and weapons (see on xlv.
5). Break down] ie., in dis-
may. Used again of Assyria, xxx.
31, XXxi. 9.

10 with us in God] Comp. Ps.
xlvi. 7, 11 (a contemporary writing ?)

11-15 A short oracle, complete in
itself, and probably written down
(so vigorous is the style) not long
after the experience described. It
has no reference to the invasion of
Rezin and Pekah, as most critics
have supposed (see on v. 12), but
explains upon what conditions the
motto ‘ Immanuel’ will be verified.
With a strong pressure...
‘The Hand’ (or, ‘the Arm of Jeho-
vah,’ liii. 1) is a personification of
the self-manifesting power of Jeho-
vah (analogous to ‘the Face of Je-
hovah’ ; see on Jix. 2), with reference
especially, though not exclusively,
(see Ex. vi. 1) to the extraordinary
deeds or words of the prophets. So
in the story of Elijah (1 Kings xviii.
46) and Elisha (2 Kings iii. 15). It
is probable enough that in ordinary
Canaanitish phraseology the phrase
was descriptive of a completely
passive ecstatic state, in which the

TEXT, conspiracy.

self-consciousness of the prophet
was entirely asleep, and that it was
retained by prophets of Jehovah,
like Isaiah, as having in their casea
comparative degree of propriety. It
is not reasonable to suppose that
Isaiah ever lost his self-conscious-
ness :—that would have been a tem-
porary suspension of his moral life.
Fortunately, we have a prophecy of
his in which he has described his
state when under the prophetic im-
pulse with pictorial vividness (chap.
vi.) It is remarkable that Ezekiel,
living in the decline of the higher
prophecy, shows a preference for a
form of speech characteristic of the
primitive stage, and rare among the
greater prophets. See Ezek. 1. 3,
lll, 22, xxxvii. I, and especially iil.
14, vill. 3. “The Hand’ only occurs
again in Isaiah in xiv. 26, and ac-
cording to Del. in xxviii. 2, which
I doubt.——The way of this
people] i.e, the low religious
views of the Israelties (both of
north and of south; see wv. 14).
Just as the Gospel-religion is called
‘this way’ in Acts ix. 2. Kocher
(Vindicia, p. 64) asks, How could
Isaiah be in danger of idolatry?
But he seems to be here described
as the head of a little society, some
of whom may have needed this ex-
hortation more than Isaiah.
Ye shall not call every-
thing . Isaiah and his dis-
ciples—in fact, the ‘church’ with-
in the nation—are the persons ad-

CHAP. VIIL.] ISAIAH. 55

people calleth a ‘holy thing,’ and the object of their fear ye
shall not fear, nor account it dreadful. ' Jehovah Sabdoth,
him shall ye count holy, and let him be your fear, and him
your dread. ' And he shall & shew himself as holy,’ and as a
stone for striking against and a rock of stumbling to both the
houses of Israel, as a gin and a snare to the inhabitants of
Jerusalem : ’and many ® shall stumble at it," and fall, and be
broken, and snared, and taken.’

16< Bind thou up the admonition, seal the instruction among

my disciples’...

7 And I will wait for Jehovah, who hideth

& Be for a sanctuary, Ew., Del., Naeg., Weir.
b Among them shall stumble, Ew., Del., Naeg. (see crit. note).

dressed. The warning corresponds
to that against necromancy in v.
19. There is to be no compromise
between the worship of Jehovah
and the rights and practices of a
lower type of religion. Indeed,
Jehovah will soon prove His ex-
clusive right to the title of ‘holy,
by the terrible ruin which, by
their own fault, shall overtake the
two houses of Israel. He will be
a ‘stone of stumbling’ to the unbe-
lievers (comp. Luke xx. 18), but (as
we may supply from xxviii. 16), a
sure support to the faithful; and
from the suddenness of his inter-
position, will be like unto ‘a gin
and a snare’ (Luke xxi. 35). No
other view of this passage seems
to me even plausible, and Gratz
deserves much credit for having
revived the forgotten emendation
of Secker. Isaiah could not forbid
his disciples to banish the word
‘confederacy’ (or rather ‘conspi-
racy’) from their vocabulary—for
this is what the ordinary view
(see . C. A., p. 32), amounts to—
‘this people’ would not be likely to
misapply such a word ; while the
theory of Roorda, Del., and Kay,
that the court party accused Isaiah
and his friends of having conspired
(comp. Am. vii. 10), is refuted by
the simple observation already
made above, that not the opponents,
but the disciples of Isaiah are the
persons here addressed.

14 Shew himself as holy] Lit.
‘become a hallowed thing ;’—be-

come =shew himself as (so often,
e.g., 1 Sam. iv. 9). Alt. rend. is
against the connection, and if sanc-
tuary = asylum, against usage.

16 Bind thou up... ] ‘But
thou, O Daniel, shut up the words,
and seal the book to the time of the
end, Dan. xii. 4, comp. viii. 26.
This parailel passage shews who
the speaker is, viz., Jehovah, who
enjoins the prophet not to trust so
important an oracle to the memory
alone, but to write it down (this is
implied as in Dan. /. ¢.), and lay
it up, carefully bound and sealed,
among his disciples (comp. xxx. 8).
So already the Targum. ‘Jehovah’s
disciples’ are of course Isaiah’s
disciples, whose relation to the
highest of teachers has been
already recognised by the plural
form of the address in v. 12 ; comp.
liv. 13. The admonition] The
word rendered ‘to testify,’ ‘admon-
ish, or ‘solemnly declare,’ is often
used of Jehovah and the prophets,
eg., Ps. lL. 7, Deut. viii. 19.——The
instruction] i.e., the prophetic
teaching or revelation (see on i. 10)
referring here to the oracle in vv,
12-15. There is surely nothing to in-
dicate a referencetothe Mosaic law:
Torah has a far wider meaning.

and I will wait... ] Isaiah
is evidently the speaker, but how
strangely abrupt is his language !
We should at least have expected,
‘And as for me I will wait,” &c.,
and even this would be only a
degree less abrupt, Has not a

56

his face from the house of Jacob,and hope in him.

ISAIAIT.

[CHAP. VIII.

'8 Behold

I and the children whom Jehovah hath given me are for signs
and for omens in Israel from Jehovah Sabdoth who dwelleth

on mount Zion.

verse dropped out between vv. 16
and 17? Considering the unsatis-
factory state of the remainder of
the chapter, the supposition can-
not be called a violent one. An
attempt has indeed been made to
bridge over vv. 16 and 17 by sup-
posing that the prophet speaks in
his own person in both verses (so
Kimchi, Drechsler, Del., Perowne).
As Dr. Perowne puts it,’ in the
former verse he utters a command,
or a petition ; in the latter, he de-
clares his own attitude in reference
to it. But in either case, it seems
impossible to make sense of ‘in my
disciples.” Were the passage a
command of Isaiah, we should ex-
pect ‘O my disciples !’ were it a
petition, ‘in the hearts of my dis-
ciples’ (comp. li. 7, Prov. vii. 3).
Del., indeed, supposes the latter to
be the meaning of the existing
text; but it is doubtful whether
even the fuller form suggested would
admit the desired interpretation.

18 Tsaiah confirms his faith by
the thought that he and _ his
children aredivinely appointed.
Signs and omens] The meaning
is plain from Ezek. xii. 11, ‘Say, I
am your omen; likeas I have done,
so shallit be done unto them ; they
shall remove and go into captivity ;’
and from Zech. iii. 8, where the
high-priest Joshua and his fellows
are called ‘men of omen.’ The
conception is, that God selects cer-
tain men to be shadows or types
of still greater men or things to
come. By the prophetic announce-
ments of their birth, and by their
divinely appointed significant names
(nomen omen), the two children of
Isaiah, like those of Hosea, were
living prophecies : and so, too, by
his steadfast faith, by his symbolic
acts (see on xx. 3), and perhaps by

19 And when they shall say unto you, ‘ Re-

circumstances in his life not known
to us, was Isaiah himself.? The last
words of the verse evidently close a
section, and confirm the impression
that the preceding passage is in-
complete.

19 The prophet warns his dis-
ciples not to give way to the solici-
tations of the soothsaying party.
The apodosis, however, is wanting.
Either it has been lost, or, like Paul
on similar occasions, the prophet
breaks off from inner excitement,
From the beginning of the sentence,
‘And when they shall say unto you,’
we may infer that he meant to con-
clude with something like ‘ Heark-
en not unto them.’ See on zv, 20.
Resort to the necromancers

Magic and necromancy
seem to have been specially pre-
valent in S. Israel. The various
kinds are named in Deut. xviii.
10, 11. A vivid picture of a ne-
cromantic consultation is given in
1 Sam. xxviii. 1-20.——That chirp
and that mutter] i.e., that imitate
the ‘squeaking and gibbering’ of
ghosts; comp. xaix. 43; //. xxiii.
101; dn. vi. 492; Tylor, Prémi-
tive Culture, i. 408. ‘Chirping’
reminds us first of all of birds, and
in the Babylonian Legend of Ishtar
(line 10) the spirits are compared
to birds. It may also allude to
the voice of children, and H. Spen-
cer quotes a passage about the
Zulu diviners, ‘The voice (of the
supposed spirits) was like that of
a very little child’ According to
Sept., the phrase is descriptive of
ventriloquism (as if 064 = ‘bottle’),
‘Read Captain Lyons’ account of
the scene in the cabin with the
Esquimaux bladder or conjurer ; it
is impossible not to be reminded
of the Witch of Endor’ (Coleridge).
— Should not people resort to

1 Sermons (1874); Exposition of Isa, viii. 16-ix. 'é

2 We might add the significant name of Isaiah himself = ‘salvation (is) Jehovah,’
But such names were not uncommon, comp. Joshua, Hosaiah, Elishua.

3 Comp. quotations in H. Spencer's Principles of Sociology, p 356.

CHAP. VIII.] ISAIAH.

27

sort to the necromancers and the wizards, that chirp and
that mutter’... . Should not a people resort to its God ?
on behalf of the living (should it apply to) the dead?!
20 To the instruction and to the admonition! * Surely they
shall speak according to this word when there is no dawning
for them.* And he shall look unto the earth, and behold,
distress and darkness, gloom of affliction, and 'thick darkness
driven (upon him) ;! ?! and he shall pass through it hard-prest

1 (Do not the people [always] resort to their gods, instead of the living to the
dead?). Ew,—Should not a people resort to their gods, on behalf of the living to
the dead? /.C.A. (1870), and so Buhl (in Luthardt's Zed¢schrift, 1883, p. 230).

« So Weir ; Perowne also ‘when’ (see crit. note).—Surely, &c., who have no day-

break, Hitz., Ew.—Or shall they not speak thus for whom, &c., Knob. Reuss, Del,
ed. 2 and 3 (corresponding question to that in v. 19).—If they speak not thus, they

are a people for whom there is no daybreak. Del. ed. 1 (after Luther).
Darkness spread abroad, Saad., Luz., Naeg.—Into darkness is he driven, Rashi,

Ew., Del. (TEXT uncertain).

their God ?] This and the following
words seem to me a parenthetical
remark of the prophet, half serious,
half ironical. To take them as a
reply suggested for Isaiah’s disci-
ples is surely rather forced; they
sound more like the words of an
interested bystander. ‘ Their God,’
i.e., the national God, Jehovah
(comp. Mic. iv. 5). Formerly (see
crit. note) I explained Elohim of
the spirits of the dead (comp. I
Sam. xxviii. 19), as if the peopie
naively exposed the absurdity of
their own conduct. Plausible ; but
would the shades be called the
Elohim of a people? ‘The dead’
does not here mean idol-gods (as
Ps. cvi. 28), but the spirits of the
dead (see Deut. xviii. 11).

20 To the instruction. . . Ji.c,
Let us rather edify ourselves by
the true oracle laid up in our
midst (v. 16). In form the words
remind us of Judg. vii. 18, ‘To Je-
hovah and to Gideon !’—-Surely
they shall speak ...] ‘The
general import of this and the fol-
lowing verses cannot be mistaken ;
but the language is so compressed
and elliptical that it is not easy to
make out the meaning and connec-
tion of several of the clauses...
The second clause admits of two le-
gitimate renderings: If they speak
not thus, or, Surely they shall speak

thus. The objection to the former
rendering is that the prophet had
already supposed them to speak
quite otherwise (v. 19)... The
latter is therefore much more ap-
propriate. The time will come when
even ¢hey who had once despised
the law and the testimony shall turn
to it in despair’ (Dr. Weir). Com-
pare for the use of the relative pro-
noun for the relative adverb ‘ when,’
Lev. iv. 22, Num. v. 29, 1 Kings
vill. 33, 38; and for the sentiment,
Ps. evii. 11-14, Ixxvili. 34. But
though the former despisers of re-
velation turn to it now in despair,
it does not follow that their appeal
to Jehovah is in vain. We might,
indeed, expect that it would be so,
comp. xxviii. 19, Am. viii. 11, 125
but ix. 1, 2 tells a different tale.
Dawning] =hope of better days,
comp. lix. 9, 10.— For them] Lit.,
for him.

21 This and the following verses
form the most difficult part of the
prophecy. They are not only ob-
scure in themselves, but, at first
sight at least, inconsistent with the
opening verses of chap. ix. Here,
hopeless gloom and distress ; there,
light and prosperity. How are
these two opposite descriptions to
be reconciled? The easiest way is
probably that adopted above, which
was suggested by Dr. Siegfried.

1 Zettschrift fir wissenschaftliche Theologte, 1872, p. 280.

58 ISAIAII,

[CHAP. IX.

and hungry; and it shall come to pass, when he is hungry,
that he shall be deeply angered, and curse ™by his king and
by his god,™ and shall look upwards.

m His king and his god, Hitz. Naeg. (comp. ii. 20).

It involves, no doubt, a transposi-
tion, but this is no novelty in criti-
cal editions of ancient texts ; for
other instances of misplaced verses,
see on xxxviil. 22. Dr. C. Taylor’s
ingenious theory! (partly antici-
pated by A. E.), that vv. 21, 22 are
a continuation of vv. 7, 8, and
describe the fate of the Assyrian
invaders (vv. 9-20 being a digres-
sion suggested by the words Im-
manu El), must, I almost fear, be
rejected, because the picture in vv.
21, 22 is so much more suitable to
a people suffering from invasion
than to the invaders, and because
it so evidently contrasts with the
vision of light in chap. ix. 1, 2.?
22,21 The unfortunate Jews look
first downward to the earth, and
then upward to heaven. No cheer-
ing sight meets them below ; we are

not yet told what vision meets their
eyes when they turn them towards
heaven. (See crit. note).——Ana
he shall look. . . ] viz., the people
personified. For the change ot
person, in the preceding verse in
the Hebr.), comp. x. 4, &c.——
Through it] i.e., through the
earth (see v. 22). Hungry] Fa-
mine being a frequent consequence
of invasion, see on xxx. 23, and
Lev. xxvi. 26. Curse by his
king and by his god] He first
curses his enemies by his god
(comp. 1 Sam. xvii. 43), and then
looks up to his god for help. ‘ King’
and ‘god’ may either be taken as
synonymous (as Am. v. 26, Hebr.,
comp. Ps. v. 2), or as meaning
respectively the earthly and the
heavenly ruler.

1 Journal of Philology, vol. vi. pp. 149-159.

? I do not argue against Dr. Taylor on the ground of the length of the digression.
There seem to be several instances of insertions being made by the prophetic writers
themselves, owing to after-thoughts. Take, e.g., xlii, 1-7, As Duhm has pointed
out, xlii. 8 fits on much better to the end of chap. xli. than to the verse which now
precedes it. Dr. Taylor will observe that I have spoken above with some hesitation.
I wish to allow room for the possibility thata passage has fallen out of the text, before
v. 21, which accounted for and led up to the description of the Assyrians (ex Ay.) in
UU, 21, 22,

CHAPTER IX.

Vv. 1-7. The conclusion of the prophecy. The mystery in the dealings
of Jehovah with His people shall be cleared up. The light of His favour
shall return, and those parts of the land of Israel which bore the first
brunt of Assyrian hostility shall be proportionately glorified. For the
Messiah shall appear, and bring the tyranny of Israel’s foes to an end.
Under him the empire of David shall be restored on an indestructible
foundation.—The tenses in the Hebr. are ‘factitive,’ or perhaps prophetic
perfects.

1 Surely there is (now) no (more) gloom to her whose lot

mute petition of the upturned eye
has been granted. In a moment
the condition of Israel is reversed.

1 Surely there is (now) no
(more) gloom... ] Alluding to
the expressions in viii. 21. The

CHAP. Ix.] ISATAH. 59

was affliction. At the former time he brought shame on the
land of Zebulun and on the land of Naphtali, but in the latter
he hath brought honour on the way by the sea, the other side
of Jordan, the district of the nations. * The people that walk
in darkness see a great light ; they that dwell in the land of
deadly shade, light shineth brilliantly upon them. *Thou
hast multiplied *exultation, thou hast increased joy :* they
rejoice before thee as with the joy in the harvest, as men
exult when they divide spoil. ‘4 For the yoke of his burden,
and the staff of his back, the rod of his task-master, thou

® So Kr., Selwyn &c. (conj.); the nation, not increased (=removed) joy, TEXT,
Hengst. Kay ; the nation, unto it thou hast increased joy, Heb. marg., MSS., Pesh.,
Targ., and most moderns. See crit. note.

The clouds are lifted, and a bril-
liant day dawns suddenly (as in lx.
1). ‘To her, ie., to Palestine,
where a hard-pressed remnant of
Israelites has been ‘walking in
darkness.’ The land of Zebu-
lun and the land of Naphtali]
i.e, the later Upper and Lower
Galilee. These were the districts
despoiled by Tiglath-Pileser, 2
Kings xv, 29, comp. Zech. x. Io.
Isaiah does not mean that these
parts shall enjoy more prosperity
than others, but that the contrast
between the past and the present
shall be greater in their case than
in others. All Israel shall rejoice,
but those parts which have suffered
longest shall rejoice most.——The
way by the sea] i.e., the district
on the W. of the Sea of Galilee, as
opposed to ‘the other side of
Jordan,’ and the ‘ circle of the na-
tions, i.e. the frontier districts
nearest to Phcenicia, including
‘the land of Cabul’ (1 Kings ix.
11-13), which formed part of the
later Upper Galilee. Via Maris,
M. Renan observes, was the name
of the high road from Acre to Da-
mascus, as late as the Crusades.
‘Way,’ however, here means re-
gion, comp. lIviii. 12, Job xxiv. 4;
‘the sea’ is the Sea of Galilee
(John vi. 1), called the Sea of Kin-
nereth in Num. xxxiv. II.

2 xn the land of deadly shade|
‘Deadly shade’ (Heb. ¢a/maveth)
is properly a title of the Hebrew

Hades (Ps. xxiii. 4, Job xxxviii.
17, see crit. note). There is no
need here (as in some places) to
weaken the sense into ‘obscurity’ ;
comp. passages like Ps. Ixxxviii.
4-6. A night like that of Hades is
followed by a blissful dawn (zd6gah,
see on Ixii. 1), somewhat as Ps.
xlix. 14.

S’ Multiplied exultation] Joy
naturally follows upon light (see lx.
1-5). Selwyn’s correction removes
the one flaw in the symmetry of
the parallelism. Otherwise the
sense of the text-reading is good ;
a supernatural increase of the
population being a common fea-
ture in Messianic descriptions, see
xxvi. 15, 18, 19, Jer. xxxi. 27, Ezek.
Xxxvi. II. Before thee] Allud-
ing to the sacrificial meals, comp.
xxv. 6, and see Deut. xii. 7, 12, 18,
xiv. 26. A religious harvest festival
goes back to the most remote
Semitic antiquity. But the phrase
has received a deeper meaning.
It is the presence of Jehovah on
which their joy depends (Vitr.).
-——When they divide spoi!]
comp. xxxiii. 23, Ps. cxix. 162.

* Thou hast broken] Through
the Messiah, as a second and
greater Gideon.——The yoke of
his burden] i.e., the yoke which
burdened him The staff of his
back] i.e., the staff with which he
was beaten. —-His task-master]
Lit., his driver. Same word and
idiom in Ex. v. 6.—— The day of

60

hast broken, as in the day of Midian.

ISAIAH,

(CHAP, IX.

5 Yca, every boot of

him that stamped » with noise, and the cloak rolled in blood

—they are to be burned up as fuel of fire.

6 For a child is

> In the noise (of battle), Ew., Del.

Midian] ‘Day’ = battle, whether
this lasts one day or more, as fre-
quently in Arabic. Comp. x. 17.

5 Isaiah wishes to describe the
permanence of Israel’s redemption.
As long as war exists, there must
be conquest and slavery. Hence
war must be destroyed; the very
emblems of war broken for ever
(comp. Milton, ‘Ode on the Nati-
vity’). So Zech. ix. 10, Ezek.
xxxix. 9, Ps. xlvi. 9 (10), Ixxvi. 3
(?), where, however, the emblems
mentioned are the various weapons,
whereas here we have the military
boot and cloak. The selection is a
happy one, as it lends itself to a
strikingly picturesque contrast. We
are shown first the warrior stalking
along in his blood-stained cloak
and boots well set with nails, and
seeming to shake the earth with
his sounding tread ; then both cloak
and boots supplying fuel for a bon-
fire. Homeric vigour and simpli-
city. ‘With noise] Lit., with
shaking ; comp. Jer. viii. 16.——
Rolled in blood] Sometimes ex-
plained as a metaphor, crimson
being the colour of the military
cloak, comp. Nah. ii. 4, Matt. xxvii.
28. But it is better taken literally.
The prophets do not mince their
language in depicting Israel’s
enemies, comp. Ixili. 2, 3, Rev.
xix. 13.

® A further security for the per-
manence of the redemption. A
prince of a new ‘order’ has arisen,
with supernatural qualities and
privileges. —- A chila is born
unto us] We must not separate
this passage from the context, and
infer that the Messiah had, accord-
ing to the prophet, already been
born at the date of the delivery or
writing down of this discourse. The
prophet is unrolling a picture of
the future, and each part of it is
introduced with a‘ factitive’ perfect
tense. He is designedly vague ;

the word rendered ‘ child’ (yéed),
will serve equally well for a new-
born infant (Ex. i. 17, ii. 3, 6), and
for a youth or young man (Gen.
xlii. 22). It is, therefore, quite un-
certain what interval is to elapse
between the birth of the child and
his public manifestation as the
Messiah. Weare not told anything
about his origin ; it is only an in-
ference that he was expected to
come from the Davidic family. The
prophet is entirely absorbed in his
wonderful character and achieve-
ments. The government] Not
that of Israel and Judah alone but,
as the parallel passage Mic. v. 3-5
shows, that of the world. A small
world, it may be said, was the
orbis Hebreis notus, but probably
it did not seem such to Isaiah:
‘conosciuto il mondo Non cresce,
anzi si scema’ (Leopardi).—— Upon
his back] Government being re-
garded as a burden—comp. vizier
(wezir)=burdened. See xxii. 22.
And his name is called] If we
took this literally, we might com-
pare the not unfrequent practice
of Assyrian kings of bearing two
names (Smith, Assurbanipal, p.
323). But of course Isaiah merely
wishes to describe the character of
the ideal king, name and character
standing in such close relation in
the Oriental mind; other examples
occur in i. 26, vii. 14 (probably), lx.
14, Jer. xi. 16, xxiii. 6, Ezek. xlviii.
35. The length of the name in the
present instance may be intended
to suggest the extraordinary cha-
racter of its bearer. It reminds us
of the long honorific names of
Egyptian kings (e.g., in the Treaty
of Peace, &. P., iv. 27, where the
royal titles of Rameses II. take up
six lines)—As to the exegesis of
the details, three views have a spe-
cial claim to be mentioned. Luz-
zatto, a great Jewish scholar (died
1865), puts the name of the Child

CHAP. Ix.]

ISATAH. 6I

born unto us, a son is given unto us, and the government
resteth upon his back, and his name is called, Wonder-Coun-

into a sentence, and renders ‘ De-
creta prodigi Iddio potente, il
sempre padre, il signor della pace.’
This is, at least, plausible. It can
be supported by the analogy of
many (short) Hebrew names (see
my ‘Index of Proper Names, with
Explanations, in Eyre & Spottis-
woode’s Varzorum Teacher's Bible),
and of the Assyrian and Babylo-
nian royal names, nine out of ten
of which form a complete sentence,
though none so long a one as this.
But the meaning which it gives is
unnatural. If the intention is to
emphasise the Divine wisdom, why
accumulate epithets of God which
do not contribute to that object?
And, above all, why employ the par-
ticiple instead of the usual verbal
form, viz., the imperfect or perfect ?
But Luzzatto is right on one impor-
tant point, viz., that all which follows
the words ‘And his name is called,’
constitutes (virtually) a single name
(though not, as he wrongly repre-
sents it, a complete sentence).
Del., though very instructive on
other points, seems to me less con-
vincing on this. He thinks (with the
older commentators) that the Mes-
siah here receives not merely one
but five names, ‘Wonder, Counsel-
lor, MightyGod, Everlasting Father,
Prince of Peace,’ thus avoiding the
necessity of supposing what he calls
(and with justice as against Luz-
zatto’s sentence-theory) a ‘sesqui-
pedalian’ name; and he justifies
such a name as ‘ Wonder’ by the
reply of the Angel of Jehovah to
Manoah in Judg. xiii. 13—a rather
doubtful argument, however, since
the Angel does not say that his name
is ‘Wonderful,’ but actually refuses
to tell it, ‘seeing that it is wonder-
ful’ (i.e. unspeakable). Two consi-
derations, however, seem to me con-
clusive against Del., (1) that Isaiah
leads us to expect a name, and not
names ; and (2)that the several titles
are arranged in a significant order
(see below).—It is more reason-
able to hold, with Ewald, that we

have here ‘two pairs of compound
names united, describing the cha-
racter of the Messiah first from
within and then from without’
(I. C..A., p. 33). Thus, ‘ Wonderful-
Counsellor’ is parallel to ‘ Ever-
lasting-Father’; both titles de-
scribe what the Messiah is at home.
‘God the Hero’ is parallel to
‘Prince of Peace’; both titles ex-
press the ability of the Messiah in
working out his plans beyond the
limits of his hereditary state-——
‘Wonder-Counsellor] i.e., either
‘one who deviseth things which are
wonderful’ (for the idiom, comp.
xxil. 2 Hebr.), or ‘wonder of a
counsellor’ (idiom as ‘wild ass of
a man,’ Gen. xvi. 12). The latter
meaning is at once linguistically
the more obvious (the natural Hebr.
equivalent of the former will be
found in xxviii. 29, Del.), and much
the more forcible. ‘Wonder-Coun-
sellor’ = one who as a counsellor is
entirely wonderful (more strictly,
exceptional, supernatural). Any
king might be called a counsellor, a
man of practical counsel, but here is
one whose political sagacity isa phe-
nomenon which can neither be de-
scribed nor comprehended. (‘Won-
der’ is a word specially used with
reference to the Divine, see Judg.
xiii, 18, Ex. xv. 11, Ps. Ixxvii. 11,
Ixxvili. 11; and comp. Isa. xxix. 14).
Isaiah has a strong sense of the im-
portance of this quality in a ruler ;
in his second sketch of the Messiah
he again lays the chief stress on
his supernatural ‘wisdom and un-
derstanding’ (xi. 2)——God the
Mighty One] ‘ Mighty,’ that is,
against His enemies (xlii. 13). The
meaning of the phrase is defined by
x. 21, where it occurs again of Jeho-
vah. It would be uncritical to infer
that Isaiah held the metaphysical
oneness of the Messiah with Jeho-
vah, but he evidently does con-
ceive of the Messiah, somewhat as
the Egyptians, Assyrians, and Baby-
lonians regarded their kings, as an
earthly representation of Divinity

62 ISAIAH.

(CHAP. IX.

sellor, God-Mighty-one, ‘Everlasting-Father,’ Prince of Peace ;
74 increased is the government and to peace there is no end,’

© Father (z.e. giver) of booty, Hitz., Kuenen, R. Martineau.
4 So Sept., Gr. ; for the increase of the government and for peace without end,

TEXT.

(see on xiv. 13, 14). No doubt
this development of the Messianic
doctrine was accelerated by contact
with foreign nations ; still it is in
harmony with fundamental Biblical
ideas and expressions. This par-
ticular title of the Messiah is no
doubt unique. But if even a
Davidic king may be described as
‘sitting upon the throne of Jehovah’
(1 Chr. xxix. 23), and the Davidic
family be said, in a predictive pas-
sage it is true, to be ‘as God (e/0-
him), as the (or, an) angel of Jeho-
vah’ (Zech. xii. 8),} much more may
similar titles be applied to the Mes-
siah. The last comparison would,
indeed, be especially suitable to the
Messiah, and it is a little strange
that we do not find it. But we do
find the Messiah, in a well-known
Psalm, invited to sit at the right
hand of Jehovah * (Ps. cx. 1), and it
is only a step further to give him
the express title, ‘God the Mighty
One,” It is no doubt a very great
title. The word selected for ‘ God’
is not e/dhim, which is applied to
the judicial authority (Ex. xxi. 6,
xxii. 8), to Moses (Ex. vii. 1),
and to the apparition of Samuel
(1 Sam. xxviil. 13); but e/, which
whenever it denotes (as it generally
does, and in Isaiah always), Divi-
nity, does so in an absolute sense :
—it is never used hyperbolically
or metaphorically. There is very
little, I think, to be said for the
other renderings of the phrase ;—
the notes of Drechsler and Knobel

may be consulted. verlasting
Father] ‘Father,’ because the
Messiah will rule in a fatherly

manner. Job was ‘a father to the
poor’ (Job xxix. 16); Eliakim is to
be ‘a father to the inhabitants of
Jerusalem’ (xxii. 21). ‘Everlast-
ing, because one who is in such
close relation with Jehovah must
be, like Jehovah (Ivii. 15), everlast-
ing. Among the titles of Rameses
II. (referred to above), is this—
‘endowed with life eternal and
for ever’ (Goodwin’s translation),
and a loyal Israelite’s cry was ‘ Let
the king live for ever.’ Much
more, thinks the prophet, can this
be said of Jehovah’s chosen one.
Were the Messiah to cease to be,
how could the Lord’s people main-
tain its ground? Through the
Messiah’s posterity? But his pos-
terity might degenerate.—This view
is not only in itself the worthiest,
but also required by the parallelism
(see above). Dathe’s explanation,
‘possessor of the attribute of
eternity, is based on a_ purely
Arabic idiom (see Ewald, Lehrbuch
der hebr. Sprache, § 273 6). Hitzig’s
and Knobel’s ‘winner, or distri-
buter, of booty,’ is against the
parallelism, and out of harmony
with the religious character of the
passage. Surely the spoii of the
enemies of Jehovah would have
been made a khérem, and been
destroyed (comp. 1 Sam. xv.).
Prince of Peace] Comp. Mic. v.
5, ‘And this man shall be Peace ;’
Zech. ix. 10, ‘he shall speak peace
to the nations.’ Such is the pro-
phetic ideal of Israelitish royalty,
in striking contrast to the false
ideal represented by Assyria.

7 The Messiah’s object—the ex-

1 J do not venture to quote Ps. xlv. 6, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever,’
as the meaning, and indeed the completeness of the text, are so much disputed.
2 This is, lam aware, not the explanation which has become traditional among

liberal critics.
retains its illustrative value.

But even on the view that the Davidic king is referred to, the passage
For if the king could be so addressed, much more could

the Messiah. A reference to some Maccabean prince (prest and king in one) seems

excluded by the ‘oracle of Jehovah,’ which opens the psa m,

For the writers of those

late periods painfully felt the want ot prophetic revelations (sce 1 Mace. xiv. 41).

CHAP. IX.]

ISAIAII.

63

upon the throne of David and throughout his kingdom, i
establishing and supporting it by justice and by righteousness

from henceforth even for ever.

Sabdoth will perform this.

The jealousy of Jehovah

8 Jehovah hath sent a word into Jacob, and it hath fallen

tension and peaceful establishment

of the Davidic kingdom. The se-
cond member of the verse is logi-
cally as well as rhythmically parallel
to the first. The throne of David
is the seat of the ‘government’ (v. 6),
and his kingdom is the scene of
the ‘endless peace.’ Ewald’s render-
ing, ‘on behalf of David’s throne,’
&c., is therefore less suitable. The
mention of David seems to imply
that the Messiah was to be one of
that king’s descendants. From
henceforth even for ever] Two
meanings are exegetically possible
(1. C.A., p. 34): 1. that the Mes-
siah shall live an immortal life on
earth, and, 2. that there shall be an
uninterrupted succession of princes
of his house. The latter is favoured
by 2 Sam. vii. 12-16; comp. Ps.
xxi. 4, Ixi. 6, 73; but the former
seems to me more in accordance
with the general tenor of the de-
scription. See on ‘ Everlasting
Father, v.6. The jealousy ... |
Jealousy is the affectional manifes-
tation of the Divine holiness. The
holiness of Jehovah, and His exclu-
sive right to objects which have
been consecrated to his service, is
maintained, in Biblical language,
by the Divine ‘jealousy.’ Holiness
and jealousy are co-ordinate terms.
Hence Josh. xxiv. 19, ‘He (Jeho-
vah) is an all-holy God; he is a
jealous God’ ; hence, too, the name
of Jehovah can be said to be ‘ Jea-
lous’; Ex. xxxiv. 14. See Oehler,
Old Test. Theology, i. 165-8.

Ix. 8-x. 4. An unusually artistic
prophecy, the four stanzas, or
strophes, of which are not only
equal in length, but marked by the
recurrence of the refrain in vv. 12,
17,21 (comp. Psalms xlii., xliii.). It
announces a judgment on the whole
of Israel, but especially on the north-
ern kingdom. There is a question

whether the past tenses in the first
three strophes are entirely historical
(Ew.), or partly historical, partly
prophetic (Hitz., Knob., Del.). ‘The
prophet places himself,” remarks
Del., ‘at a time when judgment
upon judgment has passed upon
all Israel, without producing any
amendment. . . How much or how
little of what the prophet surveys
from his “ ideal” position has really
taken place, cannot be determined.’
Ewald’s view, adopted in /. C. A.,

still seems to me the more probable
one, as it is certainly the more con-
sistent. The change from the past
to the future seems to me clearly
indicated by the form of expression
in x. 3, 4. Ewald is further of
opinion that ix. 8-x. 4 originally
came between v. 25 and v. 26-30.
To this also I must still adhere.
No one can accuse this view of
audacity who recollects how fre-
quently passages in manuscripts
are misplaced. The scribe left out
something by accident (e.g., xxxvili.
21, 22), could not afford to rewrite
his work, and so put in the missing
passage at the most convenient
place.—In /.C. 4., p. 5, I have
shown cause for dating ix. 8-x. 4
earlier than chaps. ii.—v., viz. in the
reign of Jotham (see on wv. 21).
Probably ix. 8-x. 4 was written
first, then ii. z-v. 24 was put into
its final shape, and connected with
the independent prophecy, ix. 8,
&c., by means of v. 25, whilst v.
26-30 were added last of all (note
the reference to Assyria) to form a
suitable conclusion to the whole
volume.

8 Hath sent a word] The word
of Jehovah personified ; Ps. cvii. 20,
exlvii. 15 ; comp. John xii. 48, Hebr.
iv. 12. Self-fulfilling ; Isa. lv. 11, Jer.
i. 9, v.14, comp. Num. xxiii. 25.
It hath fallen] Comp. Dan. iv. 31,

64

ISATAH.

[cHaP. IX.

in Israel, 9and the whole people shall know it, Ephraim and
the inhabitants of Samaria, [who stiffen their neck] in pride
and arrogance, saying,® '° Bricks have fallen down, but with
hewn stones will we build up; sycamores have been cut

down, but cedars will we put in their place.

" But Jehovah

exalted against him the ‘princes of Rezin, and spurred his
enemies on, '? Aram before and Philistia behind, and they

© So Bickell.

TExT may be rendered ‘in spite of (their) pride, &c., in saying.’

f Sosome MSS., Houb., Lo., Ew., Weir, Studer. —TExXT, adversaries.

Zech. ix. 1, and Mohammed’s ex-
pression (Sur. lxxvii. 23, &c.), am-
zdla, ‘he hath sent down,’ ie.,
revealed. Israel] i.e., the whole
nation, as generally in the prophets,
till N. Israel fell, and thus Israel
became practically identical with
Judah.

9 Shall know it] i.e., by expe-
rience; comp. v. 19, Hos. ix. 7,
Job xxi. 19, and Koran, xl. 72:
‘They who treat the Book as a
lie . . . shall know hereafter.’
Ephraim] i.e., especially Ephraim ;
like ‘Judah and Jerusalem,’ ii. 1.
——In pride and arrogance]
This is the first transgression of
the northern kingdom. One great
source of this irreligious temper
would be the perennial abundance
of corn and wine, good customers
for which were always at hand in
the wealthy and populous cities
of Phcenicia. Comp. Wilkins,
Phenicia and Israel, pp. 112-
114.

10 Bricks have fallen down]
Alluding perhaps to the tribute im-
posed upon Israel by Raman-Ni-
rari and Tiglath-Pileser.—For the
form of the speech, comp. Mal. i.
4. Sun-dried bricks were probably
then as now the common material
of houses in Palestine (comp. Job
iv. 19), ‘hewn stones’ being re-
served for kings and nobles (comp.
1 Kings vii. 9, Am. v. 11).——Syea-
mores] The commonest tree in
the lowlands of Palestine, still much
used in building. Cedars] Pur-
chased at a great price from the
ergs ane? 1 Kings x. 27).

4 Jt is doubtful whether the
‘past tenses’ are historical or ex-

pressive of prophetic confidence.
Exalted] i.e, placed in a po-
sition of superiority, as Ps. xx. 1
(2).——Against him] viz. Israel.
Hence, ‘who smote him, wv. 13.
The princes of Rezin] The
text-reading fails tomake sense. It
can only mean the Assyrians (comp.
2 Kings xvi. 9), but the next verse
makes it clear that the prophet
refers rather to the Syrians. Be-
sides, we want something in the
first clause nearly equivalent to ‘his
(Israel’s, not Rezin’s) enemies’ in
the second.

12 Aram before ...] Knobel
infers that the Syrians and Philis-
tines were compelled by Tiglath-
Pileser, immediately after being
conquered, to furnish auxiliaries for
his expedition against Israel. But
this, as Diestel observes, is ex-
tremely improbable, and does not
agree with the statement that the
attack proceeds from the east and
west. Delitzsch, with a keener
sense of the connection, finds here
a prediction of injuries to N. Israel
from Syria, and to Judah from the
Philistines. But he still ascribes
the impulse in the former case to
Assyria, in order to explain ‘the
adversaries of Rezin.’ It is surely
more natural to assign the pro-
phecy to which this passage be-
longs to the period preceding the
league of Rezin and Pekah. Re-
zin’s policy was to force first Israel
and then Judah into alliance with
him against Assyria. Israel and
Judah both resisted ; the resistance
of the former has found its only
permanent record in Isaiah. The
Philistines had the double stimulus

CHAP. 1X.] ISAIAH.

65
devoured Israel with open mouth. In spite of all this, his
anger turned not away, and his hand was stretched out still.
—3 But the people turned not unto him who smote him, and
unto Jehovah Sabdoth they did not resort. ‘So Jehovah cut
off from Israel head and tail, palm-branch and rush, in one
day. 1&[The elder and the honourable, he is the head ; and
the prophet who teacheth lies, he is the tail.]}* ‘And the
guides of this people became misleading, and its guided ones
lostmen. '? Therefore Jehovah "spared not® its young men,
and upon its orphans and its widows he had no compassion,
for everyone was profane, and an evil-doer, and every mouth
was speaking profanity. In spite of all this his anger turned
not away, and his hand was stretched out still.

18 For unrighteousness burned like fire, consuming thorns

& Omitted as gloss by Ew., Kuenen, &c.
b So Lagarde (conj.).—TEXT, rejoiced not (in).

of hereditary enmity to Israel and
dread of Assyria. Their territory
extended on the north to the fron-
tier of the Israelitish kingdom.

13, 14 Israel continues impenitent,
and is punished by a ‘day’ (ie,
battle, see on v. 4) in which many
lives are lost: what battle is in-
tended we cannot now say.

14 palm-branch and rush] A
proverbial expression = high andlow
(LXX. has péyav cal puxpdv) ; comp.
xix. 15. The palm-branch receives
its name in Hebr. (lit. palm of the
hand) from its upward bend. The
rush is an emblem of humiliation :
lili. 5.

18 It is difficult to defend the
genuineness of this verse. The
false prophets, being leaders of
the people, ought to belong to the
‘head’ Besides, the verse makes
the stanza or strophe too long by
averse. Hence most critics since
Koppe have included it in the list
of intrusive marginal glosses. I
admit that there is a certain hu-
mour in the passage (Del. compares
blande caudam jactare popello, Per-
sius) ; it is not a so¢ée glose (Reuss)
but simply unsuitable to the con-
text. The natural explanation of
the figures in v. 14 is given inv. 16;

VOL. I.

the ‘guides’ are the ‘head,’ the
‘ guided’ are the ‘tail.’

18 wtisleading] Here in a poli-
tical sense, as the context shows.
Lost men] Lit. swallowed up
—not here figuratively (in a ‘sea
of troubles, or in Shedl) but
simply = destroyed, as iii. 12, xxv.

, 8.
1 A variation on the theme of
vv. 13-16. The flower of the popu-
lation shall perish, as a judgment
upon their impiety. Young men]
The word is generally used with re-
ference to military service. Or-
phans ... widows] Elsewhere
represented as the objects of pecu-
liar care. Dr. Weir continues: ‘he
cannot pity, i.e., he is compelled to
restrain his compassion,’ giving the
imperfect a potential force; see
Driver, Hebrew Tenses, § 37.

18 The third transgression—‘an
unrighteousness which like burning
fire seizes upon and destroys every-
thing, both high and low, in the
nation’ (Ewald). As no class is
free from the infection of anarchy,
so none can escape its natural and
self-developed as well as divinely-
willed punishment. The lawless-
ness of the one punishes the law-
lessness of the other. There is

F

66 ISAIAH. [CHAP. x.

and briars, and kindled in the thickets of the forest, so that
they rolled upwards in a volume of smoke. '* By the fury
of Jehovah Sabdoth the land was burned up, and the people
became as fuel of fire; they had no pity for each other.
20 And one devoured on the right hand, and was hungry
(still) ; and ate on the left, and was not satisfied, every one
eating the flesh of his own arm—*! Manasseh Ephraim, and
Ephraim Manasseh—and they were together against Judah.
In spite of all this, his anger turned not away, and his hand
was stretched out still.

CHAPTER X.

1 Woe unto those who inscribe decisions of injustice, and
to the writers who register oppression, ?turning aside from
judgment the weak, and tearing away the right of the afflicted
of my people, making widows their spoil, and orphans their
prey. ° What then will ye do in the day of visitation, and in
the crashing ruin which cometh from far? towhom will ye flee

the same figure and almost the
same sentiment in xxxili. If ; comp.
on v. 18..——Thorns and briars]
Emblems of the wicked, as 2 Sam.
xxiii. 6. There is a verda/ parallel
in x. 17, 18.

18,20 General anarchy, connected
probably with the revolution which
placed Pekah on the throne; 2
Kings xv. 23-25.

20 Every one eating ... ] Comp.
xlix. 26, Zech. xi. 9. A figure either
for the insane fury which destroys
itself, or for the cruelty of rival
factions (Ges.). In the latter case,
‘arm’ =helper, as xxxiii. 2, Ps.
Ixxxiii. 9; comp. parallels from the
Arabic and Syriac in Gesen. 7hes.,
p. 4332. The religious union of the
tribes being dissolved, they were
abandoned to the disintegrating
tendency common to the less civil-
ised Semitic populations.

21 A common jealousy unites the
northern tribes against Judah. Pos-
sibly there is an allusion to the in-

cursions described in 2 Kings xv.
37, 2 Chr. xxviii. 6-15.

x. 1. The last strophe, or stanza,
chastises the tyranny of corrupt
officials. Here, as it seems, the
prophet has the condition of Judah
principally in mind. The transition
seems to us abrupt, but its possi-
bility is established by viii. 6-14
and xxviii. 1-6. The division be-
tween north and south was, in fact,
not recognised by the prophets of
Isaiah’s age. Comp. viil. 14: ‘both
the houses of Israel.’ —— Inseribe]
Lit. carve; see on xxx. 8. ‘The
carving and writing is mentioned
to indicate that the various legal
forms were carefully attended to,
whilst the law itself was trampled
under foot’ (Dr. Weir).

5 what then will ye do... |
Tronical. Such bold defiance o
God would be impossible without
an ally or a place of deposit for
your treasures,

peat ISAIAH. 67
for help, and where will ye leave your glory? ‘* Except he
crouch under the captives, and they fall under the slain !*
In spite of all this, his anger is not turned away, and his
hand is stretched out still.

= Except, &c., they will fall under the slain, Hitz.—Beltis is bowed down, Osiris is

broken down (?), Lagarde.

* Except he crouch . . . ] The
answer to the question in vw. 3.
This is the only place where the
Jewish nobles can hide their head
or deposit their glory. Alt. rend.
is the only other possible one of the
text as it stands. They must either
accept captivity ina crowded prison,

or fall by an indiscriminate mas-
sacre (comp. xiv. 19). The text-
reading is certainly difficult, but not
ungrammatical, and not inconsistent
with Isaiah’s style and thought. La-
garde’s conjecture, brilliant as it is,
is inferior in suitability. See crit.
note.

CHAPTER X. 5—XII. 6.

THIS, as Ewald remarks, is the first discourse of Isaiah’s aimed directly
and solely against the Assyrians. To the people of Judah it is almost
entirely favourable ; once only (x. 22) does the prophet glance at the
terrible fate of unbelieving Jews. It falls into two parts, the one (x.
5-34) describing the moral and spiritual antecedents of the Assyrian
invasion (from which—see on v. 22—the Judahites are already suffering,
and the great overthrow reserved for the foe) ; the other (xi. 1-xii. 6), the
blessed state of Israel and the world under the Messianic king, when all
shall recognise one standard of spiritual morality, when the scattered
members of the nation, and even distant peoples, shall gather to Jeru-
salem as the centre of religious unity. Two bursts of lyric song, put
into the mouths of the reunited nation, close the prophecy.

There are several remarkable points of contact between this prophecy
and chaps. xxviii. and xxix. : comp. x. 12 with xxviii. 21; x. 22 with xxviii.
22; x. 26 with xxviii. 15, 18; x. 33 with xxix. 7, 8; xi. 2 with xxviii. 6.
From this Ewald infers that chaps. x. xi. (chap. xii., he thinks, must have
been written by one of those ‘redeemed’ from the great exile) were
composed not long after those chapters. Samaria must at any rate have
fallen in the interval. So, at least, thinks Ewald on the ground of x. 9.
Delitzsch, however, is of opinion that the prophet is speaking from his
‘watch-tower’ (xxi. 6), and gives his intuitions the form of history. He
knows that Samaria is doomed ; he knows how Sennacherib will speak
after her fall; he knows that a hostile army will march upon Jerusalem ;
and in vv. 28-32 gives an imaginative representation of the line of the
Assyrian march. So far as this last point is concerned, Ewald is at one
with Delitzsch. ‘It is clear, he says, ‘from the context that Yesaya is
here describing [Sennacherib’s] future march as his imagination depicts
it; the perfect tense prevails merely to produce greater vividness of
description.’ Both scholars are also agreed that the invasion, when it
came, was not actually made from the quarter described by the prophet.
Prof. Robertson Smith follows Ewald, and thinks that the invader was

F2

68 ISAIAH. [CHAP. x.

made to come from the north to make the imaginary picture more
effective.’

In spite of these and most other recent critics, 1 must agree with
Sayce, Brandes, and Kleinert that Sargon and not Sennacherib is the in-
vader of the prophecy, and that the line of advance described corresponds
to fact. That Isaiah’s expectations pointed to the former is unquestion-
able, as the conquests referred to in v. 9 as recent were effected by Sargon.
It is of course quite possible that these expectations were unrealised. Just
as Esar-haddon and not Sargon fulfilled the prophecy in chap. xix., so
Sennacherib, instead of Sargon, may have carried out the Divine pur-
pose by invading Judah. If, however, we could render it probable that
Sargon invaded as well as Sennacherib, we should, I think, find it easier
to explain a group of Isaiah’s prophecies (chap. xxix.-xxxii., chap. x.
5-xi. 16, chap. xxii. and chap. i.), and to account for the fragmentary and,
as they stand, inconsistent traditions put together in chaps. xxxvi.-xxxix.
It seems that we can do so; the documentary evidence may be scanty,
still it exists, and there is good reason to suppose that it once existed in
larger abundance. We know from the cylinder inscription found at
Kouyunjik, and referred to on chap. xx., that Judah was a member of
the coalition which included Yavan, king of Ashdod, who was so severely
punished by Sargon. Unfortunately this cylinder is broken, so that the
history of Sargon’s vengeance of Judah cannot be presented in detail.
It is certain, however, that in another inscription Sargon calls himself
the conqueror of Judah: his words are, #usacnis mat-Yahudu sa asarsu
ru‘uhku, ‘the subduer of the land of Judah whose situation is remote.’ ?

Dr. Schrader in 1876 accepted the fact of Sargon’s invasion of
Judah, and welcomed it as throwing a bright light on the confused
narrative of 2 Kings xviii. (Isa. xxxvii.). ‘That Sargon,’ he said, ‘in his
campaign against Egypt, in which he penetrated as far as Raphia on the
Egyptian frontier, should not have also touched Judah, is @ Zrzord quite
inconceivable, and the contrary is expressly ratified by an inscription of
Sargon.’® In his new edition of X. A. 7., however, he takes up a different
position, and apparently treats the statement of Sargon’s inscription as
an empty boast, forgetting that Sargon is not arrogant and boastful like
Sennacherib, and does not claim to have done what he had not.

I shall have to return to the subject when treating of chaps. xxxvi.-
xxxix., and again in the first of the essays in vol. ii. Suffice it to have
recorded Schraders former endorsement of the new view: second
thoughts are not always best. Prof. Robertson Smith’s opposition is
dictated by his chronological theory, in which he mainly follows Well-
hausen. The objections expressed by him in Zhe Prophets of Israel
have been mostly answered elsewhere. But with regard (1) to the non-
mention of any conquest of Judah inthe Annals of Sargon, I may reply
here that these annals cannot claim to be exhaustive, and that the portion
for 711 seems to be little more than an extract from an eponym list,

1 The Prophets of [srael, p. 430.
2 Layard’s /nscriptions, xxxiii, 8, quoted by Sayce; Theological Review, 1873,

. 18.
es Theolog. Studien und Kritiken, vel. xlv, (1876), pp. 738-9.

CHAP. XJ ISAIAH. 69
where only the chief object of the year’s campaign is recorded. And (2),
as to the absence of any direct mention of the invasion of Sargon in the
Book of Kings ; the written traditions of the Jews have come down to us
in such a fragmentary state (thanks to the catastrophe of the Exile), that
hardly any omission can much surprise us. Is there any reason to doubt
whether Sargon captured Samaria, because the Book of Kings is silent
upon the fact? We may well be thankful for the supplementary and cor-
rective uses of the Assyrian inscriptions, and not least as students of the
prophecies of Isaiah. And if it be objected that the inscriptions have in
this case only led us to a highly probable result, I reply that this is all
that we can generally attain to in dating the products of Hebrew literature.
But even a probable result is better than none at all. A prophecy like
that before us is a historical document, and must be dated in order to be
understood.

5 Woe unto Asshur, the rod of mine anger, in whose hand
as a staff is mine indignation! ® Against a profane nation
bam I wont to” despatch him, and against the people of my
wrath to give him a charge, to take spoil and to seize prey,
and to make it a trampling, like the mire of the streets,
‘But as for him, not so doth he plan, and his heart not so
doth it reckon, for to destroy is in his heart, and to cut off
nations not a few. §& For he saith, ‘Are not my princes alto-
gether kings? %°*Is not Calno* as Carchemish? or is not

> Will I, Del.—Did I, Ges.
¢ Have I not taken the country above Babylon and Chalané, where the Tower was
built? Sept.

5 The rod of mine anger... ] tries. He has two good reasons

ie., Assyria is but the instrument
of the Divine purposes. So in Jer.
li. 20 (comp. 1. 23), Babylon is ad-
dressed as God’s ‘hammer. On
the end of the verse see crit. note.

® am I wont to despatch him]
This rendering implies that the im-
pious nationand the people of my
wrath refer to any and every na-
tion of this description; alt. rends.,
that either Israel is intended alone,
or Israel and Judah together.

7 Not so doth he plan] His
whole thought is bent on enlarging
his own empire, without regard
to the purposes of Jehovah. For
Jehovah, according to the Old
Testament, punishes even unwitting
violations of his rights (comp. 2
Sam. vi. 7).

8-11 But Sargon makes no distinc-
tion between Judah and other coun-

for feeling sure of victory: 1. his
very officers are kings—his might,
is therefore tenfold that of Heze-
kiah ; and 2. he has already cap-
tured cities as important as Jeru-
salem. Princes] As in Jer.
XXXViil. 17, Xxxix. 3.—Dr. Weir
compares this boastful speech with
the vaunts of Tiglath-Pileser I
(R. P., V. 5-26),

° Is not Calno as Carche-
misht] The fate of hoth popula-
tions was deportation, Calno being
captured in 738, Carchemish in 717
(comp. Smith, Assyria, pp. 79, 97):
There is a close parallel in a con-
temporary prophet—‘ Pass ye over
to Calneh, and see; and thence go
ye to Great Hamath, and go down
to Philistian Gath; are ye better
than those kingdoms? or is your
border greater than their border ?*

70

ISATAH.

[CHAP. x.

Hamath as Arpad ? oris not Samaria as Damascus? !° As my
hand hath found the kingdoms of the not-gods (and their
images did exceed those of Jerusalem 4), ''can I not, as I
have done to Samaria and her not-gods, so do to Jerusalem

and her images ?’
4 So Bi.

(Am. vi. 2, following Geiger), Comp.
also XxXxvi. 19, XXXVI. 13. Calno]
the more correct form, or Calneh
(Sept. Xadavn), one of the four cities
of Nimrod, is Kulunu or Zirgulla
(modern Zerghul), one of the ne-
cropolises of Chaldea, ‘on the im-
portant loop-canal between the
two main rivers of Babylonia.’ Its
mounds have been recently explored
by M. de Sarzec.! Carche-
mish] It was Mr. G. Smith’s last
fatal journey which revealed the
long-lost site of this great Euphra-
tean emporium (on its name, see
Last Words, vol. ii.), which is not
at Mabug (Hierapolis), eight or
nine miles from the Euphrates, but
at Jerabis, or Jirbas (Europos or
Oropos), on the right bank of the
river.2—Important though Carche-
mish was asa city of the Hittites
(the Assyrian Khatti and Egyptian
Kheta), it attained still greater
prosperity under the Assyrians,
especially after the overthrow of
Tyre by Sennacherib. How im-
portant it was, is shown by the
frequent references to the mana
(=Heb. maneh) of Gargamis (its
Assyrian name) as a_ standard
weight in the commercial cuneiform
inscriptions. The Hittites, on a
survey of the various evidence, do
not appear to have spoken a Semitic
tongue (see Sayce, ‘The Monu-
ments of the Hittites, in 7..S. B.A.,
vii. 248-293, and my art. ‘ Hittites,’
in £acyl. Brit., 9th ed.). Ha-
math] The Assyrian Amatu, in
early times the capital of the Khavvat
or Hivites (?), and stillan important
city under the name of Hamah.
On the hieroglyphic inscriptions

TEXT inserts ‘and Samaria ;’ but see vv. 9, II.

found there, see Burton and Drake’s
Unexplored Syria; Sayce, T.S.B.A.,
v. 22-32; Rylands, zdzd. vii. 429-
442. Arpad] the Assyrian Ar-
paddu, always coupled in O.T. with
Hamath. Its Tell or hill still pre-
serves the name of Erfad; it is
about three (German) miles from
Aleppo (Z. d@. m. G., xxv. 655).
Arpad seems to have shared the
fate of Hamath in 720 (see Smith’s
Eponynt Canon, p. 127).

10 We should have expected
Isaiah to continue, ‘How then
shall Jerusalem escape’? But two
other related thoughts suggest
themselves to his mind: First, that
Samaria and Jerusalem are in a
special manner parallel; and se-
condly, that Sargon might well re-
present the idols which, according
to him, they worshipped as inferior
in number and importance to those
of the other nations. The king-
doms of the not-gods] This would
certainly be strange in the mouth
of Sargon, however appropriate in
that of Isaiah. An Assyrian king
would not have denied that the
gods of other nations had any ex-
istence at all ; he only regarded it
as his mission to reduce them to
subjection to the supreme god
Asshur The destruction of weaker
states involved, to him, the humilia-
tion ofas many rival deities. Sar-
gon carries away captive the gods
of the king of Ashdod. Esar-had-
don improves upon this. He takes
away the gods of the Arabs, in-
scribes the idols with the praises
of Asshur, and then returns them
to their original owners. — Their
images] Sargon throws in Je-

1 Boscawen, 7. S. B. A., vi, 276-7; anon. art. in Times, Oct. 4, 1883.

* See letter from Mr, John Parsons in the 7ymes, dated Aug. 23 (1876); Bos-
coven, Statement of Pal. Frplor. Fumi, July 1881, p. 226; Wright, Proceedings of
Suc. of Biol, Archeology, Session 1880-81, pp. 58, 59.

CHAP. X.] ISAIAH, 71

2 And it shall come to pass: when the Lord shall have
finished all his work on mount Zion and in Jerusalem, I will
hold visitation on the fruit of the arrogance of the king of
Assyria and on the vainglory of the haughtiness of his eyes.
13For he hath said, ‘By the strength of my hand have I
done it, and by my wisdom, for I am discerning, and I re-
moved the bounds of peoples, and their treasures I plundered
and brought *down like a Mighty One those that sat (on
thrones) ®; 'tand my hand reached as a nest the riches of
peoples, and as a man gathereth forsaken eggs I have gathered
all the earth, and there was none that fluttered a wing, nor

e Those who were strongly seated, Heb. margin (?), A. E., Lowth.
one, Heb. marg. (?) ; like a god (or, like a steer, Del.

hovah together with the ‘heaps’
(Ivii. 13) of adopted deities. He
also confounds the worship of Je-
hovah under a symbol, prevalent
in Israel, with the imageless reli-
gion maintained by Isaiah and He-
zekiah. Did exceed] In Phe-
nicia, as in Assyria and Babylonia,
each canton and even town had
its own variety of cult (Baal-Cor,
Baal-Hacor, &c.). In Israel and
Judah the same localising ten-
dency existed ; it was derived from
the Canaanites. But the influence
of the simpler religion of Jehovah
must have checked its progress,
even in Israel, but especially in
Judah. Yet even in Judah, we
find Isaiah complaining that ‘their
land has become full of not-gods’
(ii. 8), and Jeremiah—before the
Reformation of Josiah—that ‘the
gods of Judah are become as many
as her cities’ (ii. 28 ; comp. xi. 13).
Perhaps the Sargon of Isaiah
means that the idols of the other
nations were superior, partly in
numbers, partly in importance.
A bitter insult, whether it exactly
corresponded to fact, or not !—On
the word rendered ‘images,’ see
Smith’s 2762. Dic., art. ‘ Idolatry,’
2 But theturning-point is coming.
As soon as Judah has been chas-
tised sufficiently, Jehovah will throw
the ‘rod’ away, and take notice of
these defiant words.——Shall have
finished] Lit. cut off (same word

—(As) a strong
; the enthroned, Hebr. text, Ew.

in Zech. iv. 9).——AN his work]
It is the ‘ work’ of Judah’s punish-
ment, in which the under-worker
is Assyria. See on xxviii. 21.
The fruit of the arrogance] i.e.,
the acts and words in which this
arrogance expresses itself.

18,14 Another imaginary speech
of the Assyrian king. It is a gra-
phic sketch of his victorious march,
which he ascribes to his possession
of absolute strength and wisdom.
Removed the bounds] So Ra-
man-nirari(1320B.C.) fourtimes over
styles himself ‘remover of bounda-
riesand landmarks, Smith, Assyrian
Discoveries, pp. 243-4 (Dr. Weir).
And brought down] viz., from
their high thrones (comp. xlvii. 1).
Like a Mighty One] Hebr.
Rabbir. 1 have hesitated between
the rival renderings (above). For
the former, comp. xxxiv. 7, Ps. xxii.
12 (13), 1. 133 the bull was a fa-
miliar royal emblem in Assyria.
For the latter, see Ps. lxxviii. 25,
‘bread of Mighty Ones,’ i.e. celestial
beings ; LXX., angels. The latter
seems to me now more in accord-
ance with the style of the Assyrian
royal inscriptions (see, e.g., Re-
cords of the Past, v. 17). Abbir,
Abhtr, and Addr are all divine
epithets in Hebrew (the last-named
also in Phcenician), and capable of
being used as synonyms for E£/ohinz,

cisely this language is used by

72

opened a beak, nor chirped.’

ISAIAII,

(CHAP. X

Ts the axe to vaunt itself

against him who heweth with it ? or is the saw to brag against
him who moveth it to and fro? As if a rod should move him
to and fro who lifteth it up, as if a staff should lift up that
which is not-wood !

'6 Therefore shall the Lord, f Jehovah Sabdoth,f despatch
against his fat parts Leanness, and under his glory shall burn
a burning like the burning of fire; '7 and the Light of Israel
shall be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame, and it shall
kindle and devour his briars and thorns in one day: !8and the
glory of his forest and of his garden-land, both soul and body,
shall it consume, so that it shall be like a sick man’s pining
away :'§ and the remnant of the trees of his forest shall be

£ So many MSS. and editions.
nowhere else, and is against the Massora).

Sargon in his Annals (Records of
the Past, vii. 28). As a nest]
Strictly speaking, the kingdoms are
the nests (comp. Hab. ii. 5), the
evgs are thetreasures. Metaphors
from bird-catching occur both in
Assyrian and in Egyptian royal in-
scriptions. ‘None that fluttered
a wing] None that even attempted
the feeble resistance of a bird de-
fending its nest.

1° Him who lifteth it up] The
participle is in the plural, suggest-
ing that Jehovah is referred to. So
liv. 5 Hebr. Not-wood] A com-
pound expression, = different from
wood (comp. xxxi, 8).

16-19 Assyria’s punishment de-
scribed under the familiar images
of pining sickness and fire. His
fat parts] i.e., his strong warriors,
as Ps. Ixxviil. 31. Same figure,
xvii. 4. A burning] It is the
fire which symbolises the anger of
God against sin; (comp. xxx. 27,
33, XXXL 9, XXxill. I4. See next
yerse.

1 Xsrael's Light] Again a phrase
of mythic origin used nobly as a
symbol (comp. on xxx. 27, xxxi. 9,
and especially xxxili. 14), Notice
the accumulation of Divine titles,

Text, the Lord (Adonai) Sabdoth (which occurs

expressive of the fulness and awful-
ness of the Divine perfections.
His briars and his thorns] Comp.
ix. 18. Not the common soldiers,
as opposed to the stately forest-trees
of the leaders (Lowth, Hitz. Ew.) ;
this is too realistic. The serried
battalions of Assyria remind the
prophet of a forest (comp. Dante,
Lnferno, iv.66), and their destruction
of a forest-conflagration. The fire
first catches hold of the thorns and
briars, and then passes to the crowd
of stately trees. In one day]i.e.,
in one battle (see on ix. 3).

18 His garden-land] A favour-
ite word of Isaiah’s. Hebr. £armel,
i.e, land planted with the choicer
fruit-bearing trees, such as vines
and olives (see crit. note on v. I).
Both soul and body] An
abrupt change of metaphor (comp.
1. 6). ‘Body,’ lit. flesh. Biblical
Hebrew has no word to express
our conception of ‘body.’ The
last clause is difficult; see crit.
note.

1 Few] Lit, a number. The
word is cognate with the verb in
the next clause. Write] Chil-
dren, then, could write; comp.
Judg. vill. 14.}

' The chief interest of the inscription {in the rock-tunnel of Siloam] lies in the
indication it affords of the extent to which writing was known and practised among

the Jews in the early age to which it belongs’ (Sayce),

carved by the workmen themselves

For it appears to have been

CHAP. X.] ISAIAH. 73

few, that a child may write them. And it shall come to
pass in that day: the remnant of Israel: and the escaped of
the house of Jacob, shall no longer rely upon his smiter, but
shall rely upon Jehovah, Israel’s Holy One, in faithfulness.
21 A remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob to God-
Mighty-One. ™ For though thy people, O Israel, were as the
sand of the sea, (only) a remnant of them shall return : a final
work and decisive, overflowing with righteousness! ™ Fora
8 final work and a decisive doth the Lord, Jehovah Sabdoth,
execute ® within all the ® land.

*4 Therefore thus saith the Lord, Jehovah Sabdoth, Fear
not, O my people that dwellest in Zion, because of Asshur, if
he smite thee with the rod, and lift up his staff upon thee in
the manner of Egypt. * For yet a very little while, and in-
dignation is at an end, and mine anger ‘shall serve for wasting
them away (?) ?6 And Jehovah Sabdoth shall brandish over

& So Kay. h Earth, Sept., Ew., Naeg., Weir.
i Against the world shall cease, Lu., Kr. (dividing the words in the Hebr.

differently).

20,21 The remnant of Assyria re-
mains without a promise, at least
jor the present (see on xix. 23).
The remnant of Israel, however, is
thoroughly weaned from its false
confidences, and returns to the true
God. His smiter] Assyria.
In faithfulness] Or, in steadfast-
ness. See Jer. iv. 1-4. God the
Mighty-One] God who has mani-
fested Himself as the mighty one.
They are the words (Z£/ Gzdddr)
which form the second couple in
the compound name of the Messiah.
Yet we can hardly venture to take
them as an appellation of the Mes-
siah, for it is Jehovah who acts
alone throughout this part of the
prophecy. Even later on, when the
Messiah does appear (xi. 1, &c.), it
is with more restricted functions
than in ix. 6, 7, where he is not
merely the source of happiness for
the future, but the author of deliver-
ance from misery (see on ix. 6).

22 A remnant of them] A rem-
nant certainly, but only a remnant.
A phrase of double meaning, such
as Isaiah loves (comp. v. 24). A
final work... ] Isaiah antici-
pates the worst for the impenitent,

Indeed, the judgment seems to have
begun ; the Assyrians are already
in Judah. This phrase, as modified
in next verse, recurs in xxviii. 22,
Dan. ix. 27; comp. xi. 36. Dr.
Weir sees nothing in it to hinder
him from taking vv. 21-23 as purely
consolatory (‘a remnant shall cer-
tainly return’. . ‘ destruction
shall be kept within fixed limits,’
for which last he compares Job xiv.
5). Luther reached the same result,
but by downright mistranslation.
—-Righteousness] i.e., righteous
judgment, righteous at once in ven-
geance and in lovingkindness.

°3 within all the land] Not
merely ‘in its midst ;’ comp. vi. 12.

*4 The prophet here turns to
the believing portion of the people.
With these cheering prospects they
have no occasion to fear. In
the manner of Egypt] Again a
Janus-word. For the oppression of
Egypt led to the Exodus (see wv.
26).

*6 A scourge] Comp. the flail,
the emblem of the Egyptian Horus,
as the avenger of wrongs. So
xxviii. 15, 18, Job ix. 23; comp. on
xxx, 28. As at the smiting of

ISAIAH. [CHAP. X.

74

him a scourge, as at the smiting of Midian at the rock of
Oreb, and his rod over the sea—he shall lift it up in the
manner of Egypt. * And it shall come to pass in that day:
his burden shall remove from off thy back, and his yoke
from off thy neck; yea, the yoke shall be brcken by reason
of * the fat.

°8He cometh upon Aiath, passeth through Migron: at
Michmash he layeth up his baggage: * they go through the
pass, in Geba they have taken up their lodging; Ramah
trembleth, Gibeah of Saul fleeth. *° Cry aloud, O daughter
of Gallim ; attend, Laishah ! ! answer her, Anathoth ! ! 3! Mad-
menah wandereth ; the inhabitants of Gebim save their goods
by flight. * This very day he will halt in Nob, swinging his

k Oil, Vitr., Kay, Weir.—(TEXT probably corrupt, Weir.)
1 So Pesh., Lowth, Ew., Weir.—Hebr. points, poor Anathoth !

Midian] (So ix. 3.) Or, as he
smote Midian (Naeg.), for all the
turning-points in Israel’s history are
notable signs of the energising of
Jehovah. The mention of the rock
Oreb as the chief locality is strange
(see Judg. vii.), but Isaiah may wish
to suggest that the Assyrian army
will not only be overthrown, but de-
prived of its leaders, like the Mi-
dianites. There is no sufficient
reason for supposing that Isaiah
followed a different tradition of the
Midianitish defeat (Studer, Well-
hausen). His rod over the sea]
‘And he shall pass through the sea
Affliction, and shall smite the waves
in the sea Billows’ (Zech. x. 11).
The Red Sea has become typical.
Comp. xi. 15, 16.

27 Two figures :—Israel as a bur-
den-bearer, and as an animal under
the yoke. The last clause is very
uifficult according to the rec. text.
It is surely strange to say that the
pressure of the fat of an animal
will destroy the yoke. Besides, it is

not the yoke of Israel which bursts
of itself, but Jehovah who bursts
it. Of course, the present reading
may be ingeniously defended ; but it
is much more probable (judging
from the analogy of many corrupt
passages) that there is some error
in the text. See critical note, vol. ii.

28-92 Tt is this passage which led
to the rectification of the date of
the prophecy (see Introd.). The
details are to be taken literally.
They are either Isaiah’s prophetic
anticipations (realised by the event),
or his retrospect, and relate to the
latter part of Sargon’s marchagainst
Jerusalem.— aiath] ie, Ai. It
would seem that the kingdom of
Judah extended nearly as far north
as Bethel. Elsewhere Geba is the
frontier-town (e.g., 2 Kings xxiii. 8).
See Ewald, Aestory, iv. 3.

80 Anathoth] The name is im-
portant as proving the wide preva-
lence of cults analogous to those of
Babylon.!

* This very day...] He

1 Anath is undoubtedly the same as «l”fum, the feminine of the god Anu.
Other Hebrew names compounded with Anath are Beth-anat, Beth-anoth—no mistake
is possible, for Beth-anat (Bet-anata) is transcribed in Egyptian by Thothmes with the
determinative of Divinity. Comp. also Shamgar, ‘the son of Anath.’ The male
deity, Anu, is only found in the Old Test. in the name Anammelech (Anu-malik), the
god of the colonists from Sepharvaim or Sippara, 2 Kings xvii, 31. See De Vogiié,
AMlélanges, pp. 41, 42; Lenormant, Berose, pp. 148-165, and for Anat or Anta in
Egypt, De Rougé, A/élanges d'archévlogie, 1875, p. 269. [E. Meyer denies that the
Anat of the Canaanites is to be identified with that of the neighbouring countries
(Z, D, Al. G., 1877, p. 717). Yet the view is intrinsically reasonable. }

CHAP. X1.] ISAIAH. 70
hand against the mount of the daughter of Zion, the hill of
Jerusalem. * Behold, the Lord, Jehovah Sabdoth, lops off
the mass of boughs with a terrible crash ; and the high of
stature are felled, and the lofty are brought low; **and one
shall cut down the thickets of the forest with iron, and Lebanon

shall fall through a Glorious One.

will at once press on to Nob, within
view of the city.—The site of Nob
is still uncertain. It cannot pos-
sibly be the same as Mizpeh and
Gibeon, as Lieut. Conder conjec-
tured. Major Wilson ‘cannot ima-
gine a more natural site than some
place in the vicinity of that Scopus
whence, in later years, Titus and
his legions looked down upon the
Holy City. See Josephus, &. F.,

Vv. 2, 3.——Swinging his hand]
Threateningly.

33,34 The sudden end. A hand
from above lops off the crown of
Assyria’s foliage, and lays that
proud Lebanon low. Comp. wv.
17-19, xxxii. 19. Asimilar faith in
xxix. 6. A Glorious One] i.e.,
Jehovah ; see on x. 13, and comp.
xxxill, 21, Ps. xciii. 4 (see Hebr.).

CHAPTER XI.

Comp. Oracula Sibyll., iii. 766-794, a fine paraphrase of this prophecy,
which may possibly in its turn have been imitated by Virgil (unconscious
of its Jewish origin) in the famous Fourth Eclogue.

1And there shall. come forth a shoot from the stock of

Jesse, and a twig from his roots shall bear fruit.

1 Still the figure of the tree, but
‘employed on a new subject—the
‘Jewish state. Hence a striking con-
‘trast between the fate of the cedar-
forest of Assyria and the oak of
Jesse. The cedar, being a species
of pine, throws out no fresh suckers
(see Kay ad Joc.) ; an interesting
anecdote in Herodotus (vi. 37) is
based on this fact, which also ex-
plains the dwindled numbers of the
cedars of Lebanon. But the oak
is a tree ‘in which, at the felling, a
stock is left’ (vi. 13); or, as Job
says, ‘from the smell of water it
will sprout and bring forth boughs
like a [fresh] plant’ (xiv.9). There
is a future then for the country re-
presented by the oak. As David
sprang from the humble family of
Jesse, so the Messiah, the second
David, shall arise out of great

2 And there

humiliation.—This prophecy sup-
plements the vague predictions in
vii. 14-16, ix. 6, 7. It tells us (comp.
Mic. v. 2) that the Messiah was to
belong to the family of David ; this
is all which Isaiah appears to have
known. The house of David was
large ; there was even ‘a sort of
secondary royal family ’—the house
of Nathan (Zech. xii. 12). ‘Isaiah
might well be uncertain which of
the numerous princes who were de-
scended from David was the one
chosen by God to be the national
regenerator.’ ? There is nothing to
indicate that he thought of Heze-
kiah, or of any of the children of
Hezekiah.

? Deserting the figure, the pro-
phet proceeds to describe the cha-
racter, gifts, and public conduct ot
the Messiah. He is to be David

1 See 7. C. A., p. 88; comp. p. 239.

76 ISAIAIL. [CHAP. XI.

shall rest upon him the spirit of Jehovah, a spirit of wisdom
and discernment, a spirit of counsel and might, a spirit of
knowledge and of the fear of Jehovah. *And he shall not
judge according to the sight of his eyes, nor arbitrate accord-
ing to the hearing of his ears, 4but with righteousness shall
he judge the helpless, and arbitrate with equity for the hum-
ble in the land, and he shall smite the terrible with the
sceptre of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he

slay the ungodly.

® So Bickell (see crit. note).

5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of
TEXT begins the verse, ‘And he shall draw his

breath (or, he shall find a sweet savour) in the fear of Jehovah’; but?

> So Kr., La., Gr.

and Solomon in one, equally great
in knowledge and in practice. His
qualities are arranged in three pairs,
but all spring from one source, ‘ the
Spirit of Jehovah,’ which ‘rests (per-
manently) upon him’ (comp. xlil. 1).
‘They are (1) moral and intellectual
clearness of perception, (2) the wis-
dom and bravery which befit a ruler
(comp. xxxvi. 5), (3) a knowledge
of the requirements of Jehovah
(see Mic. vi. 8), and the will to act
wgreeably to this knowledge.

% But ‘the fear of Jehovah’ is
nothing if not practical, and the
Messiah’s royal calling requires him
in the first instance to be a judge
(comp. Jer. xxi. 12). Hence the
prophet continues, He shall not
judge... ] ie., the Messiah will
rot be the sport of appearances,
like ordinary kings, nor even re-
quire a lengthened investigation.
Having ‘the spirit of knowledge’
from on high, he will‘ know what is
in man.’

4 In striking contrast to the cor-
rupt princes of Judah (i. 23, x. 2)
he will make the poor, especially
the ‘poor in spirit,” his chief care.
But the terrible, him whom all
men dread for his tyrannical be-
haviour ; or, as the next line ex-
plains it, ‘the ungodly one,’ he
shall smite, &c. This is exactly
parallel to what Isaiah says of
the Messianic period (though the
King is not there mentioned) in
xxix. 19, 20, ‘ And the humble shall
increase their joy in Jehovah
because the terrible one has come

TEXT, earth (or, land).

to nought.’ The received reading
gives the passage a different and
rather less appropriate term. The
‘earth’ must be the hostile, heathen
world, and the ‘ungodly’ a col-
lective term for its rulers (comp.
Ps. cxxv. 3, ‘the sceptre of un-
godliness’), and the prophet will
then allude to the judicial act of
vengeance which, down to the time
of John the Baptist, was regarded
as chronologically the first func-
tion of the Messiah.——with the
sceptre of his mouth] The whole
phrase is remarkable. It brings
the King very near divinity, for the
creative virtue of the word belongs
properly to Jehovah: ‘I have slain
them,’ says Jehovah, ‘ by the words
of my mouth’ (Hos. vi. 5). It is
also ascribed to the Messiah in
Zech. ix. 10, ‘ He shall speak peace
to the nations,’ and to the Servant
of Jehovah in xlix. 2 (see note).
The bearings of this point on the
questions as to the nature of the
Messiah and of the Servant will be at
once evident. There is a tempting
appearance of a parallel in Zoroas-
trianism ; but it is a mirage !—the
‘word’ or ‘words’ in a remarkable
passage of the Avesta (Vendidad,
xix. 28-34) are too certainly liturgi-
cal symbols. Obs. the Messiah is
monarch of the world, though, as
Sir E. Strachey truly observes, the
idea of the universal kingdom is
not so prominent here as in many
other places.

5 He shall be always ready for
acts of righteousness (i.e, jus-

CHAP. XL] ISAIAH. vi

his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins. ® And the
wolf shall lodge with the lamb, and the leopard lie down with
the kid, and the calf and the young lion and the fatling
together, and there shall be a little child leading them.
7And the cow and the bear °shall graze,° together shall
their young ones lie down, and the lion shall eat straw like
the ox ; ®and the suckling shall play by the hole of the asp,
and the weaned child shall stretch out his hand on the
great viper’s 4den. ® They shall not *harm nor destroy in
¢ Shall be friends, La. (but see Ixv. 2s).

4 So Pesh., Vulg., Bochart, Ges., Naeg.—Eyeball, Targ., Hitz. Ew., Del.

© Do evil, Vitr., Ew., Kay.

tice) and faithfulness (i.e., trust-
worthiness). Does not this passage
determine the sense of dA7@eva in
Eph. vi. 14? The tautology in the
repeated girdle displeases Bishop
Lowth and Dr. de Lagarde, but He-
brew ears did not mind it; comp.
xv. 8, xvi. 7, xvii. 12, 13, li. 8
(Kocher, against Lowth, in 1786).
8-9 The rest of creation shall
sympathise with this reign of vir-
tue and piety. Evil having been
eradicated from human society, it
would be incongruous that cruelty
and rapine should prevail among
the lower animals. It is stated as
the cause of the Deluge that ‘all
flesh (i.e., both man and beast) had
corrupted its way upon the earth’
(Gen. vi. 12). If the sight of the
violence and cruelty of man was
effectual for the corruption of the
original innocence of the beasts and
birds, surely the sight of their peace
and harmony would be equally po-
tent in its restoration. It is singu-
lar that nothing is said here of the
products of the earth, which gene-
rally furnish such striking features
to descriptions like the present.
Verses 6, 7, and 9 are repeated in
a condensed form in Ixv. 25.—Most
of the ancients and Calvin take the
description allegorically ; the rabbis
realistically ; Hengst. admits a se-
condary allegorical sense; Naeg.,
while adhering (and rightly) to the
realistic interpretation, takes the
details to be simply typical or sym-
bolical of a real elevation of the
natural world; Ew. is vague.

8 Great viper] Why go to
Africa for the basilisk? One of the
most beautiful but most venomous
of the vipers of Palestine is the
large yellow one, called Dadota
axanthina (Tristram).

® They shall not harm .. .]
Most of those who adopt alt. rend.
assuine that the allegorical sense of
vu. 6-8 is at least the primary one,
and make the verbs in v. 9a refer
to the citizens of the Messianic
kingdom. They seem to doubt
whether wild beasts can be called
‘evil, forgetting Gen. xxxvii. 20.
Not only, however, is it more natu-
ral to continue the realistic inter-
pretation ; but we are almost bound
to do so by lxv. 25 (see note). The
prophet argues (as suggested above)
from the improved condition of the
human world that the evil propen-
sities of the lower animals will die
out. In all my holy mountain]
ie., on the slopes of Mount Zion,
which will have been wonder-
fully transformed in accordance
with the prophecy in ii. 2, comp.
Zech. xiv. 10, Ezek. xl. 2 (Naeg.).
Or, in the whole highland-country
of Israel, comp. lvii. 13, Ps. Ixxviii.
54, Ex. xv. 17 (Hupf., Del.). The
first view is the safer; it is by no
means certain that ‘mountain’ in
the passages mentioned means the
Holy Land.—The next clause shows
that the harmlessness of the ani-
mals on the holy mountain is only
a symbol of ‘paradise regained’
throughout the whole world.——
The earth. ..] Such, and not ‘the

78 ISAIAH.

[cHaP. XI.

all my holy mountain, for the earth will have become full of
the knowledge of Jehovah, as the waters which cover the

sea,

10 And it shall come to pass in that day : the root of Jesse
which standeth for a signal to the peoples—unto him shall
the nations resort, and his resting-place shall be glory. ' And
it shall come to pass in that day: the Lord shall stretch out
his hand a second time to purchase the remnant of his people
which shall be left from Assyria and from Egypt, and from

land, must be the rendering, unless
we are prepared to limit ‘the sea’
to the waters washing the coast
of Palestine! In the next verse,
too, we have ‘peoples’ and ‘na-
tions.’

10-16 But the ‘restitution of all
things’ requires some further de-
velopment on the side of humanity.
Hence the details in the following
verses. The mention of the earth
as a whole in v. 9 suggests to the
prophet to begin with the Gen-
tiles:——The root] i.e., the plant
springing from the root, as li. 2,
Deut. xxix. 17, Sirach xlvii. 25 (22).
There is a special reason for the
phrase here; it emphasises the
contrast between the outwardly
mean origin and the ultimate great-
ness of the Messiah. For how tall
must the plant have grown, to serve
as ‘a signal to the nations.’—The
passage is alluded to in Rev. v. 5,
xxii. 16. Resort] Word specially
used of prayer (lv. 6) and of consul-
tation of oracles (viii. 19, xix. 3).
His resting-place] The word is sig-
nificant. The throne of the Messiah
is ‘for ever and ever’ (ix. 6), like
that of Elohim (Ps. xlv. 6).
Shall be glory] viz. the glory of Je-
hovah, for when Jehovah Sabdoth
(whose representative is the Mes-
siah) ‘becomes king in mount Zion,’
there shall be ‘glory before his
elders’ (xxiv. 23). Comp. iv. 5.

™ Out of chronological order
(pace Naegelsbach) the prophet
now describes the restoration of
the Israelites. The Lord shall
stretch out his hand a second
time] The ‘first time’ was clearly
at the Mosaic Exodus (x. 24, 26).

To purchase] Illustrate by
Ex. xv. 16 (xix. 5), Ps. Ixxiv. 2,
Tsay-)oa, li. 33} From Assyria
. . .] First the prophet mentions the
two greatest of Israel’s foes, Assyria
and Egypt, or rather Lower Egypt,
(Ebers), then Pathros, or South-
land (Brugsch), i.e. Upper Egypt,
and Cush, i.e. Ethiopia, then Elam
(xxii. 6) and Shinar (i.e. the country
enclosed by the Euphrates and the
Tigris from the points where these
rivers approach = Irak-Arabi), then
the neighbouring Hamath (see be-
low), and lastly the more distant
shores of the Mediterranean Sea.
Comp. parallel passage, xxvil. 13.
The extent ascribed to the disper-
sion is certainly surprising. Does
Isaiah, we must ask, describe a
present or a future state of things?
No doubt the calamities of war
(especially the fall of the northern
kingdom) had brought many Is-
raelites into foreign slavery, and
this may be alluded to in Zech. ix.
11-13 (Joel iii. 6 is, I believe, much
later). But this affords a very
inadequate explanation. Nothing
short of a succession of severe
judgments, issuing in the almost
complete destruction of the Jews
as a people, will fully account for
the emphatic language of Isaiah.
‘Jehovah stretched out his hand a
second time’ :—there must there-
fore be a correspondence between
the first and the second deliverance.
The whole people was in Egypt ; it
must be presumed that the whole
people, or so much as will be left
from the sword, will be languishing
in exile when Jehovah shall again
interpose. This implies that a suc-

CHAP. x1] ISAIAH. 79

Pathros and from Cush, and from Elam and from Shinar, and
from Hamath, and from the ‘countries of the sea.) And he
shall lift up a signal for the nations, and shall gather the out-
cast of Israel, and collect the dispersed of Judah from the four
wings of the earth ; '? and the jealousy of Ephraim shall de-
part, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim
shall not be jealous of Judah, and Judah shall not be an
adversary to Ephraim. 'And they shall pounce upon the
shoulder of Philistia towards the west: together shall they
spoil the sons of the east ; on Edom and Moab shall they

f See on xl. 15.

cession of sore judgments will have
passed over the land of Israel, as
the result of which not even ‘a
tenth part’ will be left, and ‘great
will be the desolate space within
the land’ (vi. 12). Isaiah, like the
prophets in general, idealises the
actual circumstances, and ‘sees
the entire evolution of the kingdom
of God compressed into the im-
mediate future’ (Drechsler).——
From Elam] Sargon (X. P., ix. 16)
states that he transplanted Hittites
into Elam ; of course he may have
treated Israelites so too. But we
are not bound to assume this. Jews
from Elam or Susiana (lit. ‘sons of
Elam’) appear in the list of re-
turned exiles in Ezra ii. 7—— From
Hamath] Mentioned here be-
cause the kingdom of David and of
Jeroboam II. extended thus far.
Hamath, too, is really quite as far
from Jerusalem as Cairo (about ten
days’ journey, says Mukaddasi).
Néldeke, Z. d. m. G., 1878. And
from the countries of the sea]
The only passage in which this
technical phrase occurs in the ac-
knowledged prophecies of Isaiah.
See on xl 15, and comp. Last
Words, vol. ii.

2 The raising of the signal is
mentioned again, to associate the
Israelites with the Gentiles. Hence
the true religion will be open to all
nations. The outcast (men)...
the dispersed (women)] A short
way of expressing that both sexes
will be included.

18 The inner union of the tribes

& Hostile ones, Ges.

shall correspond to the outer. The
great feud which runs through all
Israel’s history (comp. ix. 21) be-
tween north and south shall come
to an end ; those who seek to revive
it, God ‘ shall cut off’ —_—-' rhe jea-
lousy of Ephraim ]i.e., the jealousy
felt towards Ephraim in contrast to
‘the adversaries of Judah,’ i.e., the
Ephraimites. This seems to me
now a grammatically easier and
therefore more probable explanation
than its converse—‘ jealousy felt by
Ephraim’ and the ‘unquiet ones in
Judah.’ Obs. the skilful variation
in the latter part of the verse.
Ephraim, who was the object of
jealousy before, now becomes its
subject ; while Judah, at first the
sufferer from Ephraim’s hostility,
now becomes the foremost in the
feud. So Naeg., whose note throws
great light upon the passage.

14 Another picture of the Mes-
sianic age is here presented to us,
expressing the wishes of a less ac-
vanced stage of morality. Some of
the tribes had suffered greatly from
their restless and warlike neigh-
bours, whom, owing to the incom-
plete national union, they had not
been able to repel. Now, howeve:,
Israel can take his revenge. United
as one man—or rather, as one bird
of prey (Hab. i. 8)—he shall pounce
on the shoulder of Philistia (a
coast district, sloping down to the
sea like a shoulder, comp. Num.
XXxiv. II), On the sons of the east,
ie.,the Arabian and Aramaic tribes,
E. and N.E, of Palestine, and lastly

80 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XII,

put forth their hand, and the sons of Ammon shall obey
them. And Jehovah shall "lay under a ban" the tongue of
the Egyptian sea, and shall swing his hand over the River
with his i‘ violent blast, and strike it into seven channels, and
make men go over dry-shod ; '8and a highway shall be made
for the remnant of his people, as there was made for Israel

in the day of his coming up out of the land of Egypt.

b Dry up, Sept., Pesh., Targ., Vulg. (another reading).
4 So Lu., Kr. (see crit. note)—Glowing, Ew., Del., Naeg.

on the Edomites, the Moabites, and
the Ammonites (comp. Zeph. ii.
4-10).

18 A miraculous passage shall be
made for the exiles in Egypt and
Assyria.——The tongue, &c.] i.e.,
the gulf of Akaba, ‘or its former

northerly extension’ (Major Pal-
mer). ‘Tongue,’ used as in Josh.
xv. 2, 5, xviil. 19. ‘The Egyptian
sea,’ i.e., the Red Sea.— Swing
. ..] See on x. 32. —The river]
ie., the Euphrates ; comp. xliv. 27.

CHAPTER XIL

'And thou shalt say in that day, ‘I will thank thee,
Jehovah! for thou wast wroth with me: thy wrath turned

back, and thou comfortedst me.

* Behold, the God of my

salvation! I will trust and not be afraid, for my strength and
my song is * Jah, for he became unto me salvation,’
3 And ye shall draw water with joy out of the wells of

salvation.

2 So some MSS., and some editions of Targ., (as Ex. xv. 2).

4 And ye shall say in that day, ‘Give thanks to

Sept., Pesh., Vulg.,

also give but one name of God. TEXT, Jah Jehovah ; see crit. note.

1 The song of the reunited and
restored people, with whom the
prophet unites himself in spirit.
It is the counterpart of the Song
of Moses in Ex. xv. ; indeed, v. 26
is adopted from Ex. xv. 2, and v.
sa alludes to the beginning of the
song, Ex. xv. I. ;

? Salvation] The Hebr. y'sha‘ah
is a pregnant word. The root-
meaning is width of space; the
derived meaning may be as well
‘deliverance’ as ‘liberty, or ‘a
state of happiness’ (A.V. Job xxx.
15 ‘welfare’). In Isaiah, especially
in the second part, this latter mean-
ing frequently occurs. The refer-
ence, however, is not always the

same—sometimes purely temporal
blessings, sometimes mixedly tem-
poral and spiritual (comp. gwryp in
1 Tim. iv. Io).

3 The prophet encourages his
people with a promise. There will
be a constant supply of salvation
(comp. xxxiii. 6).

* Israel is to publish his mercies,
that the other nations may pay
homage to Jehovah.— —Celebrate
his name] Lit., ‘call by means of
his name.’ This may be applied in
either of the two senses, ‘ celebrate’
and ‘invoke.’ Here, as in xli. 25,
xliv. 5, the former is alone suitable ;
comp. Ex. xxxiii. 19, xxxiv, 5.

CHAP. XIIL] ISAIAH. 81
Jehovah, celebrate his name, make known his deeds among
the peoples, make mention that his name is exalted. ° Play
music unto Jehovah, for he hath done surpassingly ; let this
be known in all the earth. ®Give a shrill and ringing cry,
O inhabitress of Zion, for great within thee is the Holy One
of Israel,’

CHAPTER XIIL-XIV. 23,

THIS is the first of a series of twelve prophecies (chaps. xiii—xxiii.)
mostly directed against foreign nations. It announces the fall of Babylon,
not as an isolated fact in its relations to the Jews only, but as the
central event of the ‘day of Jehovah.’ Its tone is in harmony with
the title, extremely rare in the prophetic writings, which it gives to the
Divine Judge (El Shaddai, see on wv. 6); the softer element, so con-
spicuous in chaps. xl.-Ixvi., is entirely wanting. This remark applies
both to the preliminary prophecy in chap. xiii, and to the triumphal Ode
on the king of Babylon in chap. xiv. The poetical merits of the latter
are, however, so far superior to those of the former, that I have been led
to the conjecture (which I hope to defend elsewhere) that the Ode was
not originally composed to occupy its present position. However this
may be, it is not only a splendid enforcement of the Biblical doctrine of
retribution, but supplies most valuable illustrations of the current beliefs
—partly of the Jews, partly also of the Babylonians—as to the other
world. (With regard to the form of the Ode, see on xiv. 3.)

Sir E. Strachey (with the half-assent of Stanley!) has attempted to
show that the ‘king of Babylon’ referred to in the Ode is a king of Assyria
Uewish History and Politics, pp. 166-170), but on insufficient grounds.
It is true that Sargon is called ‘king of Babylon’ by the Babylonians
(comp. Lenormant, Les premieres civilisations, ii. 253), and that he
styles himself ‘king of Assyria and viceroy of Babylon ;’ but this does
not render it probable that ‘king of Babylon’ in the mouth of Isaiah
would mean ‘king of Assyria’ ; would any of his readers have understood
him? Is not the Ode precisely parallel to the song in chap. xlvii., where
no one has yet attempted to make Babylon equivalent to Assyria? (See
more against this view on xxxix. 8.)

1[Utterance of Babylon which Isaiah san of Amoz saw.]

1 The title is by many critics
ascribed to a later cditor, on the
grounds I. that massa, ‘utterance,’
effatum, only occurs in Isaiah in
chaps. xiii.-xxiii., and that in xvii.
I, xxi, 11, xxii. 1, it is difficult to
believe that Isaiah would not have

1 Fewish Church, ii., p. 480, note.

prefixed more suitable titles ; and
2. that the Isaianic authorship is
opposed by internal evidence. It
does not fall within my scope to
discuss the latter point here.
utterance] Not ‘burden’; 1. be-
cause the word is prefixed to at

Mr. G. Smith independently explained the

phrase of Tiglath-Pileser (7. S. B. A. ii. 328).

VOL. I.

G

82 ISAIAH, [CHAP. x11.

? Upon a bare mountain lift ye up a signal, raise the voice
unto them, swing the hand, that they may enter the gates of
the princes. *I, even I, have charged my consecrated ones,
I have also called my mighty men to execute mine anger, my
proudly triumphant ones. ‘4 Hark, a tumult in the mountains,
like as of much people! hark, the uproar of the kingdoms of
nations gathered together! Jehovah Sabdoth is mustering
the host of war. *They come from a far country, from the
end of the heavens, even Jehovah and the weapons of his in-

least four passages which are not of
a threatening purport (Zech. ix. 1,
xii. 1, Prov. xxx. I, XXxl. I 3 Comp.
Lam. ii. 14); 2. because the rebuke
in Jer. xxill. 33, &c., only yields a
good sense if we admit that the
prophets were accustomed to apply
the word zzassa@ to their prophecies
in the sense of oracle or utterance
(comp. Hupfeldon Ps. xv.3).—Ewald
divides chap. xiii. into three stanzas
or strophes :—I. vv. 2-8; IT. vv. 9-
16; III. vv. 17-22. This is plausible,
but seems to obscure the connec-
tion. The subject suggests a single
division at v. 14 (see note).

2-13 The Divine judgment upon
the world.—_—-Upon a bare moun-
tain] ‘Bare,’ i.e. treeless, that the
signal may be clearly seen. So
Balaam ‘went to a bare hill,’ to
survey the tribes of Israel (Num.
xxiii. 3). Obs., the hills of Pales-
tine were not so bare anciently as
they are now; hence the writer’s
particularity. Liftyeup... ]
A mysterious voice is heard (as in
xl. 3-6, lxii. 10), appointing a signal
for a distant army (see v. 26).
The summons being urgent, it is to
be enforced by a ringing cry (as
the army draws nearer), and by a
‘swinging (or beckoning) of the
hand’ (see for the phrase, x. 32 ;
and comp. xlix. 22). The
princes] i.e., the long-established
dynasties, which the barbarian
parvenus are to overthrow.

3 Jehovah’s explanation of the
summons in v. 2. The war is to be
a crusade, a jehdd. My conse-
crated ones] Warriors were ‘hal-
lowed’ or ‘consecrated’ by the
sacrifices offered before the cam-

paign (comp. 1 Sam. xiii. 9). The
prophet boldly declares that the
Persian army is not ‘consecrated’
to Ahuramazda, but to Jehovah.
Comp. in Q. P. B., Jer. xxii. 7, Zeph.
i. 7, and Jer. li. 27, 28 (based on our
passage).——-Mfy_ proudly tri-
umphant ones] Alluding, says
Hitz, to the vainglorious character
of the Persians, comp. Herod. i. 89.
But this is unnecessary; the phrase
describes the exuberant spirits of
the warrior, and refers not exclu-
sively to the Persians, but to all the
barbarian peoples. It recurs in
Zeph. iii. 11 in a bad sense, of the
haughty sinners of Zion. Which of
the two passages is the original, is
a complicated question, not to be
settled in a few words.

4 How vividly in three lines the
gradual approach of the invading
army is described! (Ges.)——zn
the mountains] No doubt, there is
a range of mountains (Zagros) in the
N.E. of Babylonia, but is it likely
that the prophet is thinking of his
geography? Are not the mountains
rather the ideal barriers which have
hitherto kept the barbarian peoples
at a distance from civilisation?
Nor is it merely the Babylonian
empire, but the whole world, which
is to be laid waste. We can only
understand this prophecy in con-
nection with the other eschatological
sections (see on iii. 13; and on chap.
xxiv.)

° From the end of the heavens]
Heaven being conceived as an im-
mense dome resting on the earth.
So Ps. xix. 7, Deut. iv. 32 (twice),
xxx. 4= Neh. i. 9).

CHAP. XIII]

dignation, to waste the whole earth.

ISAIAIL 83

6 Howl ye, for the day

of Jehovah is near ; as a destruction from him who is power-

ful to destroy shall it come.

7 Therefore shall all hands be

slack, and every human heart shall melt: ®and they shall be
dismayed, taking hold of pangs and throes; as a travailing
woman shall they writhe, they shall look aghast each one at

the other, faces of flames their faces.

® Comp. Joel ii. 1, Zeph.i. 7. A
day of Jehovah in its original,
popular sense is a victory of Israel’s
God over Israel’s enemies (‘day’ as
in ix. 4); see Am. v. 18, probably the
earliest passage in which the phrase
occurs. The prophets adopted the
phrase, disburdened it of its grosser
associations, and made it a symbol
of the great judicial retribution in
store both for Jew and for Gentile.
A parallel description to the present
(and of a date equally disputed) is
Joel iii, 11-16. ‘Day’ has now
ceased to mean ‘ victory,’ it comes
nearer to ‘assize’; Jehovah, in-
deed, has put off the arbitrariness
of the warrior and delights in even-
handed justice. Justice, however,
is tempered by mercy, for ‘who-
soever shall call upon the name of
Jehovah shall be saved’ (Joel ii.
32). It is impossible to unite all
the various features of this ‘day,’
as given in the different prophecies
in a single picture. See, however,
H. Schultz, Alttestamentliche Theo-
logie, pp. 690-2, and on the original
conception, W. R. Smith, Zhe Pro-
phets of Israel, p. 397- AS a
destruction ... ] i.e., with all the
characteristics (such as suddenness
and completeness, Jer. iv. 20, Weir),
of a direct intervention of the Lord
of Nature. The Hebr. is #shéd
mish-shadda?, an assonance difficult
fo reproduce tersely. So again
Joel i. 15. The name here given
to God is rarely found in the pro-
phets. Wherever it does occur
(Joel i. 15, Ezek. i. 24, x. 5), it ap-
pears to express the more severe
and awful side of the Divine nature.

® Behold, the day of

A similar impression is produced
by its use in Ruth i, 20, Ps. Ixviii.
14 (15); and though in the Book
of Job (23 times), in the Pentateuch
(8 times, excluding compound
proper names), and in Ps. xci. 1,
it seems to be used as a mere
synonym for El] or Elohim, it must
at least be clear that force, and
specially force as exhibited in a
dangerous aspect in some natural
phenomena, is the original meaning
of the word (a meaning suitable
enough in early times, comp. Ex. vi.
3). Geiger and Dr.Robertson Smith!
have shown that the interpretation
Almighty (found in Sept. generally,
in Vulg. Pentateuch, and, virtually,
sometimes in Pesh.) arises ulti-
mately out of a false etymology,
presupposed, it seems, by the
pointing, as if the word meant
‘sufficient.’ It is, of course, still
possible to derive from skadad, and
explain ‘the destructive,’ comp. the
Phoenician Sdé:d0s? ( = Arab. shadid,
violent). But as Shaddaz is in
usage generally a substantive, and
not an adjective, to El, ‘ God,’ it is
plausible to connect the word with
Aram, s/’da, ‘to throw or pour out.’
It will then have meant originally
(i.e., before its adoption by Biblical
writers) the rain-giver or the thun-
derer—a sense abundantly justified
by analogies. An Assyrian cognateis
no doubtstill wanting,unless wecom-
pare sad, mountain (projection).®
The word stands up in the later
Hebrew vocabulary like araremonu-
ment of a primitive age (Ewald).

8 Faces of flames their faces]
The phrase is difficult. Most

1 W.R. Smith, The Old Testament in the Fewish Church, pp. 423-4; comp, Ge-

senius, Thesaurus, s.v. Shaddai.

2 Philo of Byblus, Fragmenta Hist. Gr., ed. Miiller, iii. 568.
5 Or did Shaddai once mean ‘rock’? See critical note, vol. ii,

G2

84 ISAIAH,

[CHAP. XIII.

Jchovah cometh, a cruel one, with fury and burning anger, to
make the earth a desolation, and to exterminate the sinners
thereof out of it. }° For the stars of heaven, and the Orions
thereof, shall not give out their light ; the sun shall be dark at
his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to
shine. "And I will punish the world for its evil, and the
wicked for their iniquity ; and I will cause the pride of the
arrogant to cease, and the haughtiness of the terrible will I
abase. !?] will make men scarcer than fine gold, and people than
the solid gold of Ophir. 1% Therefore will I make the heavens
to tremble, and the earth shall move quaking from its place,
for the fury of Jehovah Sabdoth, and for the day of his burn-

have attempted to make it out
to be equivalent to the parallel
clause, but without success, for a
paralysing terror rather produces
paleness (Jer. xxx. 6). But is this
necessary ? May we not suppose a
transition from horror-struck alarm
to ‘excitement flashing up amidst
their terror, as when flames rise
out of thick volumes of smoke’
(Kay)? Joel ii.6sometimes quoted
is not in point ; see Q. P. B.

10 For the stars] ‘ Light is sown
for the righteous’ (Ps. xcvii. II) ;
consequently, the punishment of
the wicked takes place in darkness.
Comp. Joel ii. ro. The Orions
thereof] i.e., Orion, and the con-
stellations equal to it in brightness.
‘Orion’ is in Hebr. 2’s¢7 (whence
the name of the month Chisleu,
Ass. kistluv), the ‘foolhardy’ giant
who strove with Jehovah, as He-
brew folk-lore told (comp. Job
Xxxviil. 31). Here, however, the
original mythic element has been
almost effaced ; the name has be-
come applied to constellations in
general. (See Last Words, vol. ii.,
and comp. Steinthal in Goldziher’s
Hebrew Mythology, appendix, p.
427. (It is true, we have not absolute
certainty that the Hebrew ’sd/ is
Orion. The Chaldaeo-Assyrian as-
trology gave the name kzsz/uv to

the ninth month, connecting it with
the zodiacal sign Sagittarius. But
M. A. Stern’s argument still seems
to me a valid defence of the above
view.! We must beware of inferring
too much from the verbal corre-
spondence of allied myths.)

1 Fhe world] ‘ That is, the Baby-
lonish empire; as 77 ofxouyévy for the
Roman empire, or for Judea, Luke
ii. 1, Acts xi. 28’ (Lowth). But the
analogy of prophecy compels us
to interpret the words more strictly.
See on wv. 4.

2 ywillmake men... ] Soin
a fuller account of the judgment,
‘few men shall be left? (xxiv. 6).

13 Amidst convulsive throes, the
present world comes to an end.
See on xxiv. 19, 20.——Therefore]
Clearly this is in no immediate con-
nection with the preceding state-
ment that few men shall survive the
judgment. Rather it introduces an
intensified description of the terror
of Jehovah’s Day, and is explained
by the latter half of the verse. Be-
cause Jehovah’s anger is so hot,
therefore he will sweep away the
scene of man’s rebellion. The cor-
responding image of a new heaven
and earth does not appear in this
prophecy.—— The earth shall
move quaking ...] A clear
allusion to Job ix. 6, where the

1 See Stern in Geiger’s Fidische Zeitschrift, 1868, pp. 258-276 ; and for the Chal-
dzean view, Lenormant, Les origines de l'histoire, ed, 1, vol. i., p. 247, comp. Sayce,

in 7. S. B. A., ili, 164.

CHAP. XUL] ISAIAH. 85

ing anger. ‘And it shall be as with a gazelle which is chased,
and like sheep with none to gather them ; they shall turn every
one to his own people, and flee every one to his own land ;
every one who is found shall be thrust through, and every
one who *is caught? shall fall by the sword ; '° and their suck-
lings shall be dashed in pieces before their eyes ; spoiled shall
their houses be, and their wives ravished. '" Behold, I stir up
® So substantially, Ew., Del., Naeg.—Withdraweth himself, Ges. (Comm.), Weir.

phrase is, so to speak, at home,
arising more naturally than here
out of the context.

4-22 The first act in the world-
judgment—the overthrow of Baby-
lon. The prophet does not indeed
mention Babylon at once. But a
flash of light at the end of v. 19
clears up the details of the scene.
The place before us is a gathering-
point for strangers from all coun-
tries, and what should this be but
Babylon, with its wide commercial
relations and its mdppixros dydos
(Pers@, 53; comp. xlvii. 15, Jer. 1.
16, li. 9, 44)? e

1 Found, in the city; caught,
in battle or in flight.

17 The first to be mentioned by
name are the invaders. They are
the Medes, or, in Hebrew and As-
syrian, Madat. We cannot here
altogether avoid trenching on the
province of the ‘higher criticism,’
Even the most cursory examination
of the text suggests the twofold
question,—How can Isaiah have
referred to the Medes, and how can
a prophet of the Exile (if such a one
be the author rather than Isaiah,
on account of ‘the Medes’) o¢ have
mentioned the Persians? Some
light is thrown on the former point
by the inscriptions, which from Ra-
man-nirari III. onwards (or say,
from B.C. 810) from time to time re-
cord the conquests of the Assyrian
kings in Media, and indeed by the
Old Testament itself, for, accord-
ing to 2 Kings xvii. 6, xviii, 11, a
part of the captive Israelites had
a dwelling-place assigned to them

‘in the cities of the Medes.’ Media,
therefore, was not beyond the hori-
zon of a well-informed Hebrew
writer, and in spite of the fact that
the Medes are only mentioned in
Isaiah in prophecies of disputed
authorship (here, and in xxi. 2), and
not again till the Persian period
(Ezra vi. 2, Dan. v. 28, &c., Esth.
i. 3), I conclude that Isaiah may
conceivably have referred by name
to the Medes, just as in xxii. 6 he
refers to Elam (see, however, In-
trod. to chap. xxii.) Then (4) as
to the non-mention of the name of
Persia which might at first sight
appear surprising in a prophetic
writer of the period of the Exile.
It is quite true that the name ‘ Per-
sia’ occurs in Ezekiel (xxvii. 10,
XXxVili. 5), but this does not ex-
clude the Captivity-origin of Isaiah
xiii. any more than the occurrence
of ‘ Medes’ for ‘Persians’ in He-
rodotus or Thucydides? disproves
the contemporary origin of a work
in which the word ‘ Persians’ oc-
curs. Besides, as I have remarked
elsewhere (/. C. 4., p. 137), the
name Persia occurs in Ezekiel ‘in
company with other names which
were certainly unfamiliar to the
great majority of Hebrews;’ and
if, on philological grounds, a critic
should be led to maintain that
chap. xiii. was written by a prophet
of the Exile, he can offer an addi-
tional reason for the special men-
tion of the Medes rather than the
Persians, viz. that the generals of
Cyrus were apparently Medes (e.g.,
Mazares and Harpagus, Herod. i,

1 It is worth noticing, too, that the Egyptian commentator on Egyptian prophecies
made known to us by M. Révillout, always calls the Persians Medes (Revue Egypta

logique, 1880-81).

86 ISAIAH. [cHap. x11.

the Medes against them, who regard not silver and take no
pleasure in gold. '®And bows shall dash in pieces the
youths, and on the fruit of the womb they shall have no com-
passion ; their eye shall not be sorry for children, 1 And
Babylon, the splendour of kingdoms, the proud ornament of
Chaldea, shall be as at God’s overthrow of Sodom and
Gomorrah. * It shall be uninhabited for ever, and be un-
peopled for successive generations ; and the Arab shall not
pitch tent there, and shepherds shall not cause to lie down

there,

157, 162). The latter circumstance
is rather remarkable. It may be
accounted for partly from the im-
portant share which the Median
army had taken in Cyrus’s ear-
liest victory (they revolted against
Astyages, and sent him captive to
Cyrus), and partly from the fact, so
repugnant to the Persian mind, that
Cyrus, an Aryan by origin, had be-
come practically a non-Aryan, as
being King of ‘ Anzan’ or Elam—
he does not indeed call himself a
Persian. See the Cyrus inscription
commented upon in Essay xi.
‘Who regard not silver] Either
because it is a war for vengeance,
not for booty (Del.), or because
gold and silver money was confined
to the Semitic world, i.e. to Phce-
nicia and the regions with which
it was in relation.

19 As at God's overthrow... ]
Evidently the phrase has become
proverbial. See Am. iv, 11 in the
Hebrew, and see on i. 7.

*0 The Arab] Nomad Arabian
tribes are mentioned by Sargon on
the other side of the Tigris as far
as Elam.

21,22 Parallel passage, xxxiv. 14.
The precise species of the animals
are not always certain ; one of the
words used has Assyrian affini-
ties (see crit. note), The first
clause of the verse is antithetical to
the last of v. 20. A worse fate is
reserved for Babylon than for less
guilty cities (comp. v. 17) :—not
flocks of sheep, but their deadly
enemy, the jackal, ‘shall lie down
there.’ Then, as for ‘ their palaces,

41 But wild cats shall lie down there, and jackals

where luxury late reigned ’ (see con-
text in Par. Lost, xi. 750), the only
inhabitants shall be demons and
demon-like animals. It is worthy
of remark, that there is no mention
of demons or evil spirits, except in
prophecies upon regions utterly ex-
cluded from the kingdom of Jeho-
vah, such as Babylon and Edom
(chaps, xiii., xxxiv.), prophecies, too,
which are denied by many, if not
most, critics to Isaiah—Did the
writer or writers of these prophecies
themselves believe in the existence
of the demons? They may have
done so (at any rate, if exiles in
Babylonia), or they may have used
them as poetical decorations ; but
in either case, they entirely sub-
ordinated them to the One God,
Jehovah. None of the great pro-
phets could have written the words
which Mr. Budge has rendered thus
from an Inscription (14) in vol. iv.
of Brit, Mus. Coll., ‘ An incantation
to the desert places holy may it go
forth !’? It is more than probable,
however, that the belief in the.
demons of the desert at any rate
increased among the Jews during
the Exile, owing to its prevalence
in Babylonia and Assyria—see
Lenormant, La Magie, p. 29, and
comp. Levy, Z. a.m. G., ix. 461-491.
There is a striking Assyrian parallel
to the present passage in the dz-
nals of Assurbanipal (Cyl. A. col.
7, 1.7, 8, Smith and Lenormant).
As a feature of the devastation of
Elam, the king relates, ‘ Wild asses,
serpents, beasts of the desert, and
bull-shaped demons, safely I caused

CHAP. xIVv.] ISAIAH. 87

shall fill their houses ; and ostriches shall dwell there, and
’satyrs shall dance there; and hyzenas shall cry in °the
castles thereof,° and wolves in the palaces of luxury ; near

coming is its season, and its days shall not be prolonged.

> Wild goats, Saadya (d. 942), Alexander, Henderson.
© So Pesh., Targ., Vulg., Lo., Houb., de Rossi; their widows, TEXT.

to lie down in them.’ This passage
is remarkable for its occurrence in
a historical inscription. As for the
Babylonian documents on magic,
they simply abound in references
to the demons of the desert who
lie in wait for human prey.——
Satyrs] i.e, demons or goblins
shaped like goats, which, we know
from Lev. xvii. 7, 2 Chron. xi. 15,
were sacrificed to by some of the
Israelites. The combination is,
no doubt, an odd one to Western
readers, ‘jackals, ostriches, de-

similar one in the passage quoted
from Assurbanipal, and we shall
meet with another in xxxiv. 14.—
Coverdale’s ‘apes,’ Kay’s ‘baboons,’
are against usage. Alt. rend. is,
however, quite admissible ; see in
support of it Alexander’s note, and
De Goeje, De Gids, 1865, pp. 546-7.
Several interesting questions are
connected with the Hebr.° word
(se‘cvinz) ; see Gesenius’s Commen-
tary or Thesaurus, and Baudissin,
Studien, i. 136-9. Our passage is
imitated in Jer. 1. 39; comp. also

mons, hyenas.” But there is a ch. xxxiv. 14, 15.

CHAPTER XIV.

'For Jehovah will have compassion upon Jacob, and will
yet again choose Israel, and settle them on their own ground ;
and the foreigner shall join himself to them, and they shall
attach themselves to the house of Jacob; ?and peoples shal]
take them and bring them to their place, and the house of
Israel shall take them in possession on Jehovah’s ground for
bondmen and for bondmaids: and they shall become the

captors of their captors, and shall subdue their tyrants.

1-23 The general reason of the
judgment on the world is the world’s
accumulated sin (chap. xiii.). The
special reason of that upon Babylon
is the servitude in which it has held
Israel.

1 ‘will yet again choose] The
Captivity seemed to imply a resig-
nation on Jehovah’s part of his
rights over Israel. Comp. Hos. ix.
3, ‘ Theyshall not dwell in Jehovah’s
land,’and lxiii. 19, The foreign-
er] Lit. the sojourner (comp. Ex. xx.
Jo, ‘thysojourner’), Acharacteristic
idea of II. Isaiah ; see, e.g,, xliv. 5,

lv. 5, lvi. 3 (see note) ; as also is that
of the friendly escort given by the
Gentiles, xlix. 22, Ix. 9. In later
Hebrew ‘ sojourner’ = proselyte.

2 For bondmen and for bond.
maids] This is no doubt partly
intended as a righteous retribution
—hence the allusion to their ‘ty-
rants.’ But in the case of some
of the Gentiles, we are meant to
suppose that fear will have passed
into love, and that they will press
for admission into the community
of Israel in even the lowest capa-
city, This is clearly a part of the

88 ISAIAH, [CHAP. XIV.

3 And it shall come to pass in the day that Jehovah
giveth thee rest from thy travail and from thy disquiet, and
from the hard service which men laid upon thee, that thou
shalt take up this taunt-song upon the king of Babylon, and
shalt say :—‘ How is the tyrant stilled—the * raging stilled !
* Jehovah hath broken the staff of the wicked, the rod of the
rulers, ® which smote peoples in passion with an unceasing
stroke, which trampled down nations in anger with a
*trampling unrestrained! 7 Quiet and at rest is all the earth;
they burst out into a ringing sound. ® The pine-trees also
rejoice at thee, the cedars of Lebanon, ‘Since thou liest low,

the feller cometh not up against us,’

* So Sept., Aquila, Pesh., Targ., Ges., Ew., Weir, Naeg., Bii—TExt, golden

(city).

>’ So Déderlein, Ges., Ew., Alexander.—TEXT, persecution.

prophet’s meaning (z/ the song was
originally written for tts present
place), for he has just spoken of a
voluntary adhesion on the part of
‘the sojourners.’ Comp. also xlv.
14; but contrast lvi. 6, 7, where the
‘foreigners’ are allowed to ‘join
themselves unto Jehovah’ on equal
terms with born Jews.——Shall
subdue Thus the promise
in Deut. xv. 6 shall be ultimately
fulfilled.

3 Phe hard service] See on xvii.
6. This phan td Hebr. 7a-
shal, i.e, a parallelistic poem
(Dichtung)—the parallelism may
consist either in the moral applica-
tion of emblems, or simply in the
parallel disposition of the lines
and the sense. From the fact that
emblems were generally applied in
a witty, satirical manner, sashal
sometimes obtains the meaning of
taunt-song, as here, and in Mic. ii.
4, Hab. ii. 6. Sept. translates
Opnvov, a rendering of mashal
which is nowhere else found, but
which though unsuitable enough to
the contents (the condolence in vv.
10, 12 being only bitter affectation),
is justified by the form of this
mashal. ts resemblance to the
first four Lamentations is all the
more remarkable, as xiii. 1-xiv. 2,
and xiv. 22, 23, are written in an

entirely different style.—The song
falls into five strophes, each con-
sisting of seven long lines (v. 17 6
is the only exception). This, how-
ever, involves accepting Ewald’s
arrangement of vv. 19, 20 (see end
of note on v. 20), Verses 22 and
23 form an epilogue or appendix.

7 They burst out...] The
phrase only occurs besides in II.
Isaiah (4 times); the verb also
in Ps. xcviii. 4 (comp. Isa. lii. 9).

® The pine-trees] According to
Schrader the Hebr. &’7dsh and Ass.
burasu, mean the so-called sherbin-
tree (my own rend. of faffur in xli.
19, see note) ; Tristram prefers the
Aleppo pine, a tree highly character-
istic of Lower Lebanon, and only
inferior tothe cedar. The cypress,
which Ewald and many others have
adopted, is said to be rare in Le-
banon, and probably had another
name in Hebrew corresponding to
Ass. fabvan and Aram. dafrono
(see Schrader, K. G. F., p. 218).
Rejoice at thee} The poet
knows nothing of our modern dual-
ism. Man and nature sympathise
(comp. Gen. iii. 18). The passage
is therefore not really parallel to
Virgil’s ‘Intonsi montes,’ &c. (see
Conington’s Vergtl, vol. i., Intro-
duction.) But why are the trees
of Lebanon mentioned. Because

CHAP. XIv.]

ISATAH.

89

® Shedl beneath is disturbed at thee, to meet thee at thy
coming : it stirreth up for thee the shades, all the ° bell-wethers
of the earth; it maketh to arise from their thrones all the

kings of the nations.

10 They all answer and say unto thee,

Thou also art made weak as we ; thou art made like unto us!
4 Thy pride is brought down to Shedl, (and) the sound of thy
© So Kay.

they had been cut down (a type of
Israel’s ruin) by the Babylonians,
see on xxxvii. 24.

® Shedl is disturbed] Starts up
in excitement on the arrival of so
eminent a stranger. The same
verb is applied to the shade of
Samuel (1 Sam. xxviii. 15). In this
first clause, therefore, Shedl may
perhaps be used collectively of the
entire population of shades. In
the next clause, however, the choice
of the verb and the change of gen-
der from feminine to masculine in-
dicates that Shedl is personified as
a single Will, whose electrifying
influence not even kingly shades
can resist. The personification
(audacissima, Rosenmiiller) may be
aided by a lingering consciousness
of the original mythical demigod
Shedl (if the theory offered on v.
14 be correct).——-Stirreth up the
shades] The ‘shades’ are the
‘weak,’ the ‘nerveless,’as their name
in Hebrew and Pheenician 7‘/aim
indicates—comp. eiSwda xapovror.
Hence they need to be ‘ stirred up.’
A similar phrase occurs in the
Babylonio-Assyrian Legend of Ish-
tar (ed. Schrader, pp. 8, 9), where
the goddes Ishtar threatens that
she will ‘ stir up the dead’ The
bell-wethers|]1.e., the princes. So
Zech. x. 3, comp. Jer. 1. 8, and so
in Accadian and Assyrian (Friedr.
Del.). Bell-wethers and rams are
frequently used as figures in Arab
war-songs (Kremer), and a Hebrew
proverb-writer, in a list of comely
things, mentions a he-goat and a
king. Comp. Tristram’s Natural
History of the Bible, p. 88.——

Maketh to arise .. . ] If we may
interpret this on the analogy of the
superstitions of primitive races else-
where, it would seem to indicate a
lingering popular belief among the
Jews that the political and social
relations once formed were not in-
terrupted by death. Once a king,
for ever aking. (Again comp. the
Legend of Ishtar.) Hence the kings
here are said to be seated on their
thrones ; hence the dead warriors
in Ezek xxxii. 27 have their swords
buried with them (to ensure a
phantom-sword in Shedl); and
hence the prophet Samuel is said
to come up from Shedl wearing his
accustomed robe (1 Sam. xxviii. 14).
It would seem, too, as if the kings
and warriors were believed to have
a whole compartment of Shedl to
themselves (see on v. 14).

10 The astonishment of the kings
at the fall of so great a being
(comp. Lucian’s 13th Dialogue of
the Dead (ad init). Shall an-
swer] ‘To answer’ is used widely
in Hebrew. Sometimes the ques-
tion is expressed, sometimes only
suggested by the circumstances as
here (comp. Job iii. 2). Here the
address of the shades is at an end.

11 Contains a triumphal exclama-
tion of the Jews. The cause of
their joy only comes out by de-
grees. First, it seems to be the
cessation of all that pomp and
luxury for which Babylon was
famous. Then, the collapse of the
king’s blasphemous dreams of dei-
fication. Finally, the insults heaped
upon his dead body are detailed.
The sound of thy cymbals]

1 Comp. a strikingly parallel description of Amenti, the Egyptian Hades, trans-
lated from a papyrus by Lepsius, and given in English in Bonwick's Egyptian Belief

and Modern Thought, pp. 46, 47.

go

ISAIAH.

[CHapP. xIVv.

cymbals: beneath thee the maggot is spread out, and thy

covering is the worm!

2 How art thou fallen from the heavens, O Shining One, son
of the Dawn! how art thou hewn down to the ground, that

didst overpower the nations!

On Babylonian music, comp. Dan.
ii. 5, &c., and Prof. Rawlinson’s
Ancient Monarchies, ili. 19, 20.
Beneath thee ... ] Worms are
his only cushion and coverlet.

2 How art thou fallen... ]
Parallel passages, Lam. ii. 1, Matt.
xi. 23. In his pride and splendour
the king of Babylon had been like
the morning-star (comp. Rev. xxii.
16), here described as a ‘ som of the
Dawn’ (the Dawn, personified, is
a relic of the mythic stage ; comp.
in the Hebr. Job iii. 9, xli. 10, Ps.
cxxxix. I1). The Assyrian texts
refer to a masculine as well as a
feminine Venus. The former had
a title (muste/l) closely related to
the Hebr. Aé/é, rendered here
‘Shining One’; its period was
from sunset onwards, that of the
feminine Venus from sunrise on-
wards.! Kosters? finds here an
allusion, parallel to that in xxiv.
21, to the belief in the jurisdic-
tion of the star-spirits over the
kingdoms ofthe earth. This seems
to be supported by the words of
the king in the next verse (on which
Dr. Kay propounds a similar
view).

13,14 The sin of the king of
Babylon, self-deification. Let me
remark here that, amply justified as
the Hebrew poet is by the language
of some parts of the inscriptions, the
sentiment of humility and repent-
ance was not unknown to the kings
of Assyria and Babylon. ‘Ils sa-
vaient faire un retour sur eux-
mémes, et s’avouer pécheurs sous
les coups qui les frappaient.’* They
were ‘gods of the nations’ (Ezek.
xxxi. 11), but avowed their weak-
ness before the only ‘great gods.’

3 And thou didst say in thine

See the penitential Psalms, trans-
lated by Sayce (&. P., vii. 153-6).
—And thou] (thou, who art
brought so low). . . To the hea-
vens will Z go up] This is not a
mere hyperbole of rhetorical origin
(comp. Job. xx. 6, and perhaps Ps.
Ixxiii. 9), any more than the saluta-
tion ‘O king, live for ever!’ is a
mere hyperbole ; it has rather a
solid foundation in primitive reli-
gious belief. We must not, how-
ever, connect it with the stories of
Titans scaling the heavens, but
with the Oriental belief in kings as
incarnations of the Divine. The
Egyptians, no doubt, gave the ful-
lest expression to this belief, but
the Assyrian kings (e.g., Shal-
maneser and Assurbanipal) are
distinctly called sons of this and
that deity—the proto-Babylonians
went even further, as we may argue
from the determinative of divinity
prefixed to some of the kings’ names
(see Last Words, vol. ii.). It was
but rational to take the next step,
and admit these semi-divine beings .
toa share in the family life of their
celestial parents. I do not know
that this can be proved as yet in the
case of the Assyrians and Baby-
lonians, though the mention of the
‘land of the silver sky’ (= heaven),
in the Royal Psalm translated by
Schrader, and less accurately by
Fox Talbot (2. P., iii. 133), confirms
the conjecture that such a belief
existed. Even apart from this, we
have the same right to use the
statement of the prophet as to a
Babylonian belief that we have to
use the parallel statement of Ezekiel
relative to the Tyrian doctrine on
the same subject (Ezek. xxviii. 2, 6,

1 Oppert, Fournal Asiatigue, 1871, p. 448; Schrader, Theol. Stud. u. Kritiken,
1874, p. 337; Friedr. Delitzsch, German translation of Smith's Chadd. Genesis, p. 271.

2 Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1876, p. 50.

3 Lenormant, La divination, p. 212; comp. his paper in Revue politique et lite

tératre, Sept. 1, 1877.

CHAP. XIV.]

ISAIAH.

gI

heart, To the heavens will I go up, above the stars of God

will I raise my throne, and

9, 13, 14). How largely this view
increases the force of the passage,
I need hardly point out. The king
of Babylon expected to join the
ranks of the gods. No, replies the
prophet, thou shalt be hurled down
to Shedl (uv. 15). ‘The mountain
of assembly] or . . . of meeting.
The expression is not found else-
where, but the meaning is clear. It
is a mountain whose summit is
among the ‘stars of God,’ and
whose base is ‘in the recesses of
the north.” Mount Zion, which
early writers fix upon with one
consent (comp. ‘tent of assem-
bly, or ‘of meeting,’ Ex. xxvii. 21,
&c.), is therefore at once excluded,
unless, with Dr. Weir, we regard it
‘with the eye of faith’ as the Zion
of the Messianic age, which shall
be ‘exalted above the hills’ (ii. 2;
comp. Heb. xii. 22-24), and even
then we have only tried to remove
half the difficulty, for froma Hebrew
point of view Jerusalem was the
centre of the earth (Ezek. v. 5),
and from a Babylonian certainly
not in the extreme north. No one
probably would have thought of
mount Zion, were it not for the
apparent parallelism of Ps. xlviii.
2 (3): ‘ Beautiful of elevation, the
joy of the whole earth, mount Zion,
the recesses of the north, the city
of the great King.’ What this pas-
sage means, no one has yet been
able satisfactorily to explain, and
very possibly the words ‘the re-
cesses of the north’ are an interpo-
lation due to a scribe who inter-
preted ‘the city of the great King’
of Nineveh. At any rate, we have
no right to interpret a clear pas-
sage by our private hypothesis re-
specting an obscureone. Dr. Weir’s
candid concession, however, greatly
simplifies the discussion between
the advocates and the adversaries
of the traditional explanation. Let
it be granted, for the moment, that

I will sit on the mountain of

the Babylonian king anticipates
lording it over the sacred mountain
of Israel. Still it is not of that
mountain in its phenomenal but in
its ideal character that he speaks—
not of mount Zion as it appears, but
as it is before God, and will be one
day before men. Now, aconception
of this kind would be unintelligible
to a Babylonian, unless he could
connect it with some similar beliefs
of his own people. That similar
beliefs existed among the Indians,
Iranians, Greeks, and other races,
has long been known, bnt it is only
since the recent advances of Assy-
riology that we have learned their
existence among the Assyrians and
Babylonians. Among the titles of
the great god Assur is ‘king of all
the assembly of the great gods’
(Sayce, FR. P., iii. 83), and there is
a fragment of Berosus (Moses of
Khorene, i. 7), which speaks of a
mountain of the assembly of the
gods. In the inscriptions this
mountain is most frequently called
‘the mountain of the lands’ (i.e., of
the world), and in a bilingual text
(W.A.1,, iv. 27,2) we read that, like
Atlas, ‘its head rivals heaven’
(Sayce; Friedr. Del.). That it
was placed in the north has not
yet been ascertained, but may be
assumed from our passage as not
improbable.

We are not bound, however, to
identify the ‘mountain of assembly’
either with mount Zion or (tempt-
ing as this may be) with any spe-
cially Babylonian mythic mountain.
Ezek. xxvili. 13, 14 proves that there
was a tradition, akin to the Baby-
lonian, among the Jews themselves,
of a ‘holy mountain of Elohim,’ on
the slopes of which lay the garden
or rather paradise (park) of Eden.?
This tradition, which may have
been a primitive heirloom, is quite
sufficient to account for the lan-
guage poetically given to the Baby-

1 Comp. Dante's Terrestrial Paradise on the summit of the mountain of Purgatory,

92 ISAIAIL. [CHAP. XIV,
assembly in the recesses of the north; I will go up above
the heights of the clouds, I will make myself like the Most
High. Nevertheless, thou art brought down to Shedl, to
the recesses of the pit.

© Those who see thee shall look narrowly and gaze
earnestly at thee, ‘Is this the man who made the earth to
tremble, who made kingdoms to quake, '’ who made the
world as a wilderness, and broke down the cities thereof;
who released not his prisoners to their home?’ 38 All the
kings of the earth, even all of them, lie in honour, each one in
his house ; '8and ¢ou art flung away from thy grave, as an
abhorred shoot, clothed with those who are slain, who are
thrust through with the sword, as a carcase trodden under

foot.

204 Those who have gone down to the stones of the pit,?

4 This forms part of the last line but one of v. 19 in Hebr. text. See below.

lonian monarch. The recesses
of the north] There was a myste-
rious sanctity attaching tothe north ;
comp. Lev. i. 11, Ezek. i. 4, Job
xxxvil. 22, The Sabians in Harran
turned to the north in prayer (En-
Nedim, af. Chwolson). Comp. also
Servius ad Virg. 2n. ii. 693, &c. ;
Laws of Manu, i. 67, ii. 52, 70.

4 The Most High] A favourite
phrase in Daniel, and in the Apo-
crypha. See Plumptre, Lzd/ecal
Studies, pp. 17-36; Geiger, Ur-
schrift, p. 33.

15 Nevertheless] Said in grave
satire. Not to the recesses (or far
parts) of the north, but to those of
the pit. Instead of scaling the
heights of Olympus, thou art thrust
within the gates of Hades at its
base! It was the Babylonian be-
lief that the dark land of Ardlu
( = Shedl) lay underneath the World-
mountain. Hence Sargon speaks
of the gods and goddesses who have
been ‘steadfastly (£z2zs) brought
forth amidst the house of the moun-
tain of the lands, of Aradlu’ (Khor-
sabad Inscr., ]. 156). See Friedr.
Del., Paradies, 117; Schrader,
K.A.T. 389. Obs. the conceptions
of the pit (or grave) and Sheol tend

towards fusion. Comp. Ixvi. 24
(note), where only the torments of
the dead body are spoken of, but
those of the soul (or shade) are
equally in the mind of the writer,
and are only not described from
his sense of their indescribable-
ness.

16-19 A further reason for the
triumph of the singers of the mashal.
The scene is the field of battle (as
Ixvi. 24) ; the object of contempla-
tion no longer the feeble shade,
but the unburied corpse.

18 Other kings of more modest
pretensions are buried honourably,
each one in his house, i.e. in a
sepulchre of his own. The trouble
which Egyptian kings took about
their pyramid-graves is well known.
The Babylonian tyrant, too, had
built one for himself (‘ thy grave’),
but was never to occupy it. ‘House’
=grave, as in Eccles. xii. 5, ‘his
(man’s) perpetual house,’ and as in
Phoenician (Afe/z¢. ii. 1) and Egyp-
tian (Ebers, Aegypren, i. 169).—
Clothed] But not with grave-
clothes! A strange expression, and
the correctness of the text may be
doubted.

*° A curse supposed to be pro-

CHAP. XIV.]

ISATAH.

93

with those thou shalt not be joined in burial, because thou
hast destroyed thy land and slain thy people ; unnamed for

ever shall be the seed of evil-doers!

21 Prepare ye for his

sons a place of slaughter, because of the iniquity of their
fathers ; that they may not arise nor take the land in posses-
sion, nor fill the face of the world with ° heaps.

2 And I will arise against them, is the oracle of Jehovah
Sabdoth, and cut off from Babylon name and remnant, and

progeny and offspring, is the oracle of Jehovah,

73 And I

will make it a possession of the bittern, and pools of water,

¢ So Hitz.—Terrible ones, Ew.—Cities, or enemies (Targ. Ges.), TEXT.—Wars,

Sept.

nounced upon the king and his
family (Ex. xx. 5)—still upon the
-field of battle. He himself is ex-
cluded from burial with his prede-
cessors—for a king the highest
possible disgrace (2 Chr. xxi. 20,
xxiv. 25, Jer. xxii. 19, Ezek. xxix.
5). The phraseology of the curse
may be paralleled from various
sources—Greek, Egyptian, Assy-
rian, Babylonian, Phoenician. For
the four former, see Ebers, Aegypien,
i.169; Schlottmann, Eschmunazar,
p. 37; Records of the Past, v. 26,
ix. 36; and for the latter comp.
these lines from the Inscr. of Esh-
munazar, king of Sidon (iv. 4-6,
Schl.): ‘Let him (the king who
opens the lid of this couch) not
have a couch with the shades, and
let him not be buried in the grave,
and let him not have son and seed
in his stead.’ Thus, the king of
Babylon is mulcted of immortality
in two senses: he neither drinks
of the water of life with the gods
(comp. on v. 13), nor lives again
(according to the old Semitic view)
in his children. And the cause of
all this (regarding the sin of the
king from a fresh point of view) is
that his ambitious wars have been
the ruin of his country—because
thou hast destroyed thy land, &c.
The words here placed at the head
of the verse have received a most
unsuitable place in the received
text. It is difficult, in fact, to make

any strict exegesis of them there.
How is it possible that those who
have been slain by the side of the
king of Babylon should be described
as ‘those who are buried in a costly
tomb built of hewn stones’? for such
is clearly the meaning of the words
those who have gone down (or go
down) to the stones of the pit.
Surely this was a most unlikely
honour for the masses of the slain!
Ewald’s arrangement is both natu-
ral in itself, and greatly relieves
v. 19, which before was awkwardly
long. Heaps] i.e., ruined cities ;
comp. xvii. 1, Ps. Ixxix. 1. ‘Cities’
gives no good sense. Why should
cities be denounced so unquali-
fiedly? See crit. note.

*2, 28 The song is at an end, and is
supplemented by a direct revelation
from Jehovah, extending the punish-
ment to the whole of Babylon.—
The assonances in v. 22 are in-
imitable. Bittern] Generally
‘hedgehog,’ but this does not fre-
quent the marshes. The bittern is
still common in the reedy swamps
of the Euphrates, and its ‘strange,
booming note’ (Tristram) is as
awesome a sound as the wail of
the hyena. Comp. Last Words,
vol. ii—The besom of destruc-
tion] Dr. Goldziher’s reference to
a supposed myth (Hebrew Myth-
ology, p. 27) is ingenious, but un-
necessary ; comp. ‘the sieve of
annihilation’ (xxx. 28).

94 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XIV

and will sweep it with the besom of destruction, is the oracle
of Jehovah Sabdoth.

vv. 24-27. A solemn repetition of Jehovah’s assurance of the impend-
ing destruction of the Assyrian invaders. The circumstances closely
resemble those of chap. x. 5-xii. 6; and a part of v.25 is almost identical
with a part of x. 27. The passage must once have stood close to the
former prophecy, without, however, strictly speaking, belonging to it.

24Sworn has Jehovah Sabdoth, saying, Surely, according
as I have planned, so shall it be; and according as I have
purposed, that shall stand; *to break Assyria in my land,
and upon my mountains to tread him under foot, and his yoke
shall remove from off them, and his burden remove from off
his back. %§ This is the purpose which is purposed concern-
ing all the earth, and this is the hand which is stretched out
over all the nations. *’ For Jehovah Sabdoth hath purposed,
and who can annul it, and his is the outstretched hand, and
who can turn it back?

vu. 28-32. The Philistines are exulting over the death of their op-
pressor; but the prophet sees that their joy is premature. Meantime
Judah is enjoying repose after her troubles.—This is the first of a series
of prophecies on foreign nations called forth by the alarming progress
of the Assyrians. ‘Out of the north a smoke cometh.’ It is a question
whether the king of Assyria, whose hosts are referred to, is Tiglath-
Pileser, Sargon, or Sennacherib. The late Mr. George Smith (7. S. B. 4.,
ii. 325) supposed him to be the former, but the analogy of neighbouring
prophecies, in which only Sargon or Sennacherib can be referred to, is
against this view. It has also been doubted whether both the persons
spoken of in the prophecy, the one under the figure of a ‘rod’ or a
‘snake,’ the other under that of a ‘great viper’ or a ‘ flying serpent,’ are
Assyrian kings, or whether only the latter is so, the former being the
Jewish king, Ahaz (so /.C. A., after Ewald). It is certainly most natural
to understand them as successive Assyrian kings, and the only objection
is the chronological statement in the heading, which implies that Ahaz is
the rod which was broken, and consequently that the depredations of the

2 xy mountains] It would
seem as if the Assyrians were now
encamped on the hills of Judah be-
fore Jerusalem (comp. x. 32). The
same phrase in xlix. II, Ixv. 9,
Zech. xiv. 5, Ezek. xxxvill. 21. It
reminds us of the fancy of the
Syrians that Jehovah was ‘a god

of the mountains’ (1 Kings xx.
23).

*° All the earth] Partly be-
cause this is an act of the great
drama of the world-judgment; partly
because of the solidarity of all na-
tions—‘ when one member suffers,
all the members suffer with it.’

CHAP. XIV.] ISAIAH,.

95

Philistines in the land of Judah (2 Chr. xxviii. 18) supplied the motive for
the prophecy. But the genuineness of this, as of other headings in
Isaiah, is most questionable (see /. C. A., p. 41); the heading seems to
have originated in a fancy adopted also in the Targum that the ‘rod’
or the ‘snake’ (zakhash) meant ‘the stock of Jesse (xi. 1), Jesse being.
identified with the Nahash of 2 Sam. xvii. 25.1 This would make Heze-
kiah ‘the basilisk” and the Messiah ‘the flying serpent’; it is, however,
obviously contradicted by the description of the Jews as being (though:
secure themselves from attack) ‘ poor’ and ‘ helpless,’ in fact, as incapable
of taking vengeance or making conquests.

28 [In the death-year of king Ahaz came this utterance.]

29 Rejoice not, entire Philistia, that the rod which smote thee
is broken, for out of the snake’s root shall come forth a great
viper, and its fruit is a flying serpent. * And ‘the first-born
of the poor shall feed and the needy shall securely lie down;
but I will kill thy root with famine, and thy remnant shall he
slay. 3! Howl, O gate; cry, O city ; faint, entire Philistia!
for out of the north a smoke cometh, and there is no straggler
in his bands. *?. And what shall one answer the messengers of

£ On my meadows, Hupfeld (conj.).
28 ¥n the death-year. . . Ji.e.,

before the death of Ahaz (comp. on
vi. 1). Rejoice not] The news

ways of serpents (Culturgeschichte
des Orients, ii. 257). Herodotus
(ii. 75, Comp. iii, 107) also refers

of the murder of Sargon, B.C. 705,
and the revolt of Babylonia, much
excited the smaller nations.
Entire Philistia] Alluding to the
principalities into which Philistia
was divided (comp. ix. 8 Hebr.)
The rod] So Assyria is called in
ix. 4, x. 5 (20), 24, 26; and Baby-
lon in xiv. 5,6. Sargon is meant
here. He is also the ‘snake’ ; just
as Sennacherib is both a ‘great
viper’ (xi. 8) and a ‘flying serpent.’
For the pair of symbols for one
‘person, comp. perhaps xxvii. 1.
‘Root’ and ‘fruit’ in the sequel
are suggested by the ‘ rod..——a
flying serpent] A popular belief
used poetically (comp. parallels in
xili, 21, xxxiv. 14, 15)—not a light-
ning-myth, as Goldziher, but to be
compared with the flying white ser-
pents of Arabic literature (‘Aghdny,
xx. 135’), which were really 7zzz or
malicious genii. Kremer well ac-
counts for this from the ghost-like

to winged serpents which invaded
Egypt from Arabia—a ‘traveller's
tale.’ Comp. on xxx. 6.—Here the
‘serpent’ is the symbol of the
destructive power of Assyria. The
Hebr. is savaf; comp. Seraphim
(vi. 2 note).

50 The first-born of the poor]
i.e., the most needy, as ‘the sons
of the poor’ (Ps. 1xxii. 4), are simply
the poor. Comp. Job xviii. 13.
Hupfeld’s conjecture is plausible,
but unnecessary.——Z will kill
... he shall slay] Change of
persons, as in Zech. ix, 10. The
subject is Jehovah.

31 @ gate] So the wall is per-
sonified in Lam. ii. 8; comp. 18.
Out of the north] So of the
Babylonian invasion ; Jer. i. 14, x.
22, xlvi. 20, xlvii. 2. Comp. Isa.
x. 28-32.—A smoke] It is the
smoke of the towns and villages
burnt by the Assyrians.

32 The messengers of the na-

1 Prof. Robertson Smith, The Prophets of Israel, p. 432.

96 ISAIAH. [CHAP. xv.

the Snation? That Jehovah hath founded Zion, and in her
the afflicted of his people can seek refuge.

& Nations, Sept., Pesh., Targ., Gr.
tion] i.e., either the Philistines or Hath founded Zion] Jerusalem is
the Assyrians (comp. Nah. ii. 13 secured, not by its natural defences,

end), the one seeking Hezekiah’s but by its God. Comp. xxviii. 16,
aid, the other threatening him.

CHAPTERS XV.-XVI.

UNDOUBTEDLY a prophecy against Moab (see xvi. 13). I am not myself
certain whether the predictive element pervades the whole prophecy, or
whether it is confined (at any rate in chap. xv.) to v.94. All critics,
however, except Eichhorn, adopt the former alternative, according to
which the invasion of Moab is still future, and the prophet, with vivid
imagination, describes what the inhabitants of the different localities will
feel, say, and do in their distress. The vision (as it may laxly be termed)
falls into three parts (xv. I-9, xvi. 1-5, 6-12), and is followed by two verses
announcing the speedy fulfilment of that which ‘Jehovah hath spoken
formerly,’

These two appended verses are admitted by all critics (except Bleek
and Geiger) to be the work of Isaiah. But there is a difference of opinion
as to the authorship of the preceding prophecy. The statement in the
appendix may mean either that Isaiah adopts and ratifies the work of an
earlier prophet, or simply that he is now enabled to give a more specific
revelation. We have already had an instance of the case supposed by the
former alternative in ii. 2-4, and Jeremiah has adopted and expanded this
very oracle in part of chap. xlviii. One of the psalms, too, probably has
the substance of an ancient oracle imbedded in it (Ps. Ix.). The con-
jecture of non-Isaianic authorship is therefore a perfectly natural one;
can it also be said to be required by the contents of the prophecy? The
reasons for an affirmative answer are two :—1. The flow of sympathy, un-
paralleled in Isaiah, towards the objects of the predicted judgment ; 2.
The writers minute acquaintance with Moabitish topography, which
points to a N. Israelite ; and 3. The tediousness and archaic simplicity
of the style (note the accumulation of assonances in the Hebrew, and of
‘for’ and ‘therefore’), combined with certain words and phrases un-
known to Isaiah. On the other hand, it is urged: 1. that Isaiah does
occasionally give way to an elegiac mood (see i. 2-6, 21, xxii. 4, xxviii.
1-4), and though the other instances of this relate to Judah or Israel,
the historical connection between Israel and Moab may account for
Isaiah’s sympathy with this kindred people; and 2. (for the argument
from the topographical knowledge, however slight, cannot be replied to)
that the non-Isaianic words and phrases (Knobel’s list requires sifting)
may be balanced by the Isaianic parallels (?), especially in xvi. 44, 5.
My own impression is very strongly against the Isaianic authorship of

CHAP. XV.] ISAIAH. 97
the prophecy, except the verse anda half just referred to. 1 would not
deny, however, that Isaiah may have altered words here and there, as
Jeremiah did afterwards, and the obscurity of xvi. 1-4 leads me to con-
jecture that the original text has here been shortened. See further, Las¢
Words, vol. ii.

It would be unwise to dogmatise as to the date of the original pro-
phecy. It was at any rate subsequent to the revolt of Mesha, king of
Moab, who, as we learn from the AZoadzte Stone, recovered and fortified
(‘built’) the towns which Omri, king of Israel, had destroyed. Seven
(probably) of the names in this prophecy are mentioned on the Moabitish
monument— Dibon, Nebo, Arnon, Jahaz, Medeba, Horonaim, Sibmah
(see on xvi. 8), from which Dean (now Bishop) Walsh has inferred that
‘Isaiah’ and Jeremiah were acquainted with the inscription. Comp.
further the writer’s Commentary on Jeremiah (chap. xlviii.).

The name of the original foe of the Moabites is not mentioned, but
the description points to a nomad or semi-nomad population, either the
Arabs (Ew.) or the Israelitish tribes on the E. of the Jordan (Hitz.) The
enemy expected, and perhaps dimly referred to in xv. 9 (‘the lion’), is
undoubtedly either Sargon or Sennacherib, The north side of the Arnon

seems to have been a battle-field of races.
1[Utterance of Moab]. For in the night Ar-Moab was
stormed, was ruined ! for in the night Kir-Moab was stormed,

was ruined !

1 For] This particle occurs no
less than fourteen times in this
and the next chapter. It is pro-
bably in all cases causal or ex-
planatory, and we may conjecture
that words like ‘Alas for Moab!’
or ‘Lament ye for Moab !’ were in
the mind of the writer (comp.
xxiii, i. 14), though in his lync
excitement he forgot to express
them. Some have accounted for
the frequency of the word ‘for’
as an imitation of a Moabitish
peculiarity. This seems to be at
any rate the case with the next
word in the Hebrew (see critical
note). Yn the night] When
the terrors of a stormed town
would be at their height; comp.
Ps. xci. 5, ‘the terror by night.’
Mesha, king of Moab, boasts of
having assaulted Nebo at dawn
(Moabite Stone, 2 15). Ar-
Moab] i.e., citadel of Moab (Targ.
has #rakka, i.e. ‘fortress.’) This
was clearly the capital ; it seems to
be the unnamed city described in
Josh. xiii. 9, 16, and also the Are-
opolis mentioned in Eusebius and

VOL. I

2 He is gone up to the temple, even Dibon to

Stephen of Byzantium, and in the
acts of Synods of the fifth and
sixth centuries ——Kir-Moab]i.e.,
city of Moab. Probably the still
existing Kerak (the ‘ Petra Deserta’
of the middle ages), which rises
impregnably on a peak more than
4,000 feet above the Dead Sea,
surrounded on all sides by still
higher mountains (which may ex-
plain 2 Kings iii. 25 end). Dr.
Ginsburg, however, disputes this
and the last identification. Obs.
no less than nineteen or twenty
Moabite towns are mentioned in
this and the next chapter. A
similar profusion of names occurs
in the inscription of king Mesha
(the so-called Moabite Stone).
These very early documents, com-
bined with the many ruined cities
and temples, the thousands of
cisterns, and the roads paved
with squared blocks, prove that
the fertile plains of Moab were
once occupied by a people not a
whit inferior in civilisation to the
Israelites.

? He is gone up] The subject

I

ISAIAH. [CHAP. XV.

98
the high places to weep: on Nebo and on Medeba Moab
howleth ; on all their heads is baldness ; every beard is cut
off. %In his (Moab’s) streets they are girded with sackcloth ;
on his roofs and in his *broad places* he entirely howleth,
running down in weeping. ‘And Heshbon crieth out, and
Elealeh ; even to Jahaz their voice is heard ; therefore the
men at arms of Moab shriek, his soul quivereth within him.
5b The heart of Moab crieth out * * even unto Zoar, a third

® Bazaars, Weir.—Market-places, Kay.

b So partly Sept., Targ. (see crit. note).
even to Zoar) the fat heifer, Ges, (1829). . .

of the verb must be borrowed from
the second clause. —— The temple]
Lit. the house. No doubt the
prophet means the Beth-bamoth
(‘House of High Places’) of the
inscription on the Moabite Stone
(7. 27), which Schlottmann rightly
identified with the Bamoth-Baal
mentioned in Josh. xiii. 17, side by
side with Dibon. Instead of simply
saying ‘Dibon is gone up to Beth-
bamoth to weep, the prophet breaks
the clause into two, for there can be
little doubt that ‘the high places’
in the second member of the verse
means the same spot as ‘the temple’
in the first. Conder identifies these
‘bamoth’ with a group of dolmens
at Mushibtyeh (Pal. Fund State-
ment, April, 1882); but would not
the Moabites prefer altars of their
own building ?—— Dibon] i.e., its
population, is naturally said to ‘ go
up,’ lying as it does in a plain (‘the
plain of Medeba unto Dibon,’ Josh.
xiii. 9). It lies in a direct line
north of Aroer and the Arnon.
Here (its modern name is Dibdn)
the famous Moabite Stone was
found—and broken up, though it
has been skilfully pieced together,
as far as possible, and now rests
in the Louvre. See the English
monograph on the inscription by
Dr. Ginsburg, and the German
ones by Schlottmann and Ndldeke.
—Dibon was one of the towns
claimed by the Reubenites (Num.
xxxii, 34), but the Inscription of
Mesha states (line 10) that ‘the
men of Gad dwelt in the land...
from of old,,——- On Nebo and on

For Moab (whose fugitives have come
her fugitives have come unto Zoar, even

Medeba] Nebo is of course not
the mountain-range so called, but
a town near, deriving its name from
the same old Semitic divinity.
Medeba, at any rate, is on an
eminence. On all their heads
is baldness] Comp. xxii. 12:
‘And in that day did the Lord
Jehovah Sabdoth call to weeping,
and to mourning, and to baldness,
and to girding with — sackcloth,’
Job i. 20, Mic. i. 16. Had this
cutting of the hair originally a
sacrificial import (comp. Deut.
xiv. 1, and Tylor, Primitive
Culture, iii. 364)? It may be so,
but here it is merely symbolical.
It was also the primitive Arabic
custom ; see Krehl, Re/égton der
vorislamit. Araber, p. 33, note 1,
and compare Herod. il. 36.—Je-
remiah further elaborates the de-
scription (xlviii. 37).

5 Running down.... Lit.
coming down. So Jeremiah, ‘that
our eyes may run down in tears’
(ix. 18, comp. xiii. 17, xiv. 17). By
a bold extension of the figure, the
whole person is represented as im-
mersed in tears.

4 Heshbon ... Elealeh] Neigh-
bouring hill towns. Jabaz] Far
to the south, about midway between
Heshbon and_ Kir-hareseth.—
His soul... | The Moabitish
people is personified. There is a
play upon sounds in the two verbs
rendcred ‘shriek’ and ‘ quivereth’
(‘ wail’ and ‘ quails,’ Rodwell).

° The prophet now turns more
to the south of Moab. Zoar |
Mr. Grove places Zoar at the north

CHAP. Xv] ISATAH, 99

year heifer®; for the ascent to Luhith—with weeping doth he
ascend it, for in the “way to Horonaim a cry of destruction
they “shout. ®For the waters of Nimrim become desolate ;
for withered is the grass, gone is the herbage, verdure there
is none. 7 Therefore the abundance which they have ac-
quired, and their store-—over the torrent of the poplars must
they carry it. ° For the cry hath gone round the border of
those of the fat heifr, Luzzatto. . . . whose bars (so Weir) reached even to Zoar—the

fat heifer (so Naeg.), Vulg., Del. (Vowel-points, too, suggest rendering, for
‘fugitives,’ ‘bars’ (i.e. defences); whilst Ew., Graf on Jer., and Dietrich in Merx's

Archiv i. 342-6, for ‘the fat heifer,’ render, ‘to the third Eglath.’)

© Descent, Graf (with Jer. xlviii. 5).

end of the Dead Sea, in the parallel
of Jericho (Smith’s Dzct. of the
Bible); but 1 still follow Wetzstein
(excursus in Delitzsch’s Gemesés, 4th
ed.), who fixes it at the S.E. of the
Sea in the Gor es-Safia. The emi-
grants hope to get round by this
way into the territory of Judah.——
Athird year heifer] It is doubt-
full whether the crying of Moab is
compared to that of a thwarted
heifer, or whether the ‘heifer’ is a
metaphorical description of the for-
tress of Zoar (comp. accents). I
prefer the former view, which is
substantially that of Vitr. and of the
A.V. of Jer. xlviii. 34. It is a third
year heifer, just about to be broken
in for the yoke (Plin. Azs¢. Wat.
viii. 4, 5), of which the prophet is
thinking. Those who adhere to the
common text can still explain the
figure of Moab. Ewald’s rendering
assumes that there were three Eg-
laths in Moab, whichreceives a pre-
carious support from Ezekiel’s refer-
ence to ‘En Eglaim (Ezek. xlvii. 10),
Abulfeda’s to an ‘ Ejliin (see Ges.),
and Josephus’ to an Agalla (Azz.
xiv. 1, 4). Comp. also WVo¢es and
Criticisms, p. 20. Horonaim]
Probably on the borders of Edom :
perhaps, too, the city of Sanballat
‘the Horonite.’

® To the capture of the cities of
Moab and the flight of the inhabit-
ants a fresh reason for lamentation
is added, viz., that the fertiliz-
ing waters of Nimrim have been
stopped up at their sources by the
enemy (comp. 2 Kings iii. 19, 25).

4 So Lagarde.—TExT, raise (?).

These waters gave their name to
the town Beth-Nimra (Num, xxxii.
36). The name Nimara occurs
among the towns conquered by
Thothmes I1I. Canon Tristram
speaks of the ‘plenteous brooks
gushing from the lofty hills into
the Ghor-en-Numeira’ (comp. Nim-
rim); another site is proposed by
Consul Wetzstein in the Wady
So‘éb, 133 miles east of Jordan (ap.
Delitzsch, Genesis, ed. 4, pp. 572,
3). The name contains a reference
to the panther, and appears, like
many other animal-names of per-
sons and places, to be rightly viewed
as a vestige of totemism (see Las?
Words, vol. ii.).

7 The land of Moab being now
uninhabitable, the Moabites cross
the border into Edom, carrying
what they can save of their pro-
perty with them.— The torrent
ofthe poplars] Not ‘the torrent
of the Arabs’ (as Pesh., Saad., xo
Sept.), nor ‘the torrent of the
wastes’ (as Hitz, Ew., Knob., cf.
Am. vi. 14). Probably the Wady
el-Ahsa, which formed the extreme
northern boundary between Moab
and Edom, and which is further
identified with the torrent Zered,
Num, xxi. 12, Deut. ii. 13. The
poplar intended is the Populus
Euphratica, the only Syrian habitat
of which is the Ghor. See Wetz-
stein, ap. Del. of. cz¢. p. 567.

8 No part of the land escapes.
The cry] i.e., the cry of de-
struction (v. 5).

H 2

100

ISATAH.

[CHAP. XVI.

Moab; even to Eglaim its howling (hath reached), and to

Beer Elim its howling.

9 For the waters of Dimon are full of

blood ; for I destine for Dimon fresh (evils), for the escaped
ones of Moab a lion, and for the remnant of the land.

’ The waters of Dimon] i.e.,
the Arnon, just as the Kishon is
described (Judg. v. 19) as the waters
of Megiddo (Del.). It might with
equal accuracy have been called
“the waters of Ar-Moab,’ but the
prophet wishes to enforce his words
by a striking assonance. Dimon
suggests the thought of da, ‘blood,’
as if it meant town of carnage.
Comp. Sanguinetto = blood-stream,
the name of a small brook which
falls into Lake Thrasimene, the
scene of Hannibal’s great battle;
comp. also the similar allusions in
Mic. i. 10-15. The name Dimon pro-

bably occurs again in Jer. xlviii. 2
(see on xxv. 10). It is only another
form of Dibon. St. Jerome tells us
that in his day both names were
current for the same place.——
Fresh (evils) . . . a lon (or, lions)]
An enigmatical description of a
conquering foe, either Judah (Hitz.,
Del., cf. Gen. xlix. 9), or (more
probably—see xiv. 29, xxi. 16, 17,
and comp. xvi. 4, 14) the Assyrians,
who, as the Inscriptions prove,
began to influence the fortunes of
Palestine as early as the time of
Ahab. For the figure, comp. v.
29, Jer. iv. 7.

CHAPTER XVI.

'<Send ye *the lambs of the ruler* of the land from Sela
towards the wilderness, unto the mountain of the daughter of

4 Tribute, ye rulers, Gratz (conj.).

Chap. xvi. Verses 1-6 are dra-
matic in style,and necessarily rather
obscure, an indication of the names
of the several speakers not being
customary in Hebrew. It is very
possible, too, that the text is either
imperfect or misarranged.

1 Send ye the lambs] According
to 2 Kings iii. 4, Mesha, king of
Moab, ‘rendered unto the king of
Israel 100,000 lambs, and 100,000
rams, with the wool,’ though on the
death of Ahab he definitively re-
nounced his allegiance. The pro-
phet, as a devoted adherent of the
Davidic family, exhorts the Moab-
ites to renew their long-suspended
tribute to their original suzerain,
the king of Jerusalem (see 2 Sam.
viii. 2); or, it may be, the chiefs of
the Moabites exhort each other to
take this step, as the power of the
kingdom of Samaria is no longer
adequate to the protection of Moab.

It is a little uncertain whether this
section presupposes the same situ-
ation as the preceding verses—
whether, that is, the Moabitish
fugitives are now in Edom (this
would account for the mention of
Sela in v. 1), or whether the pro-
phet has shifted his point of view,
and regards the Moabites as still
on their own side of the border.
In the latter case, the speaker or
speakers of v. 1 recommend for
the tribute-bearers the southern
route, which passed by Sela and
traversed the desert, because the
north end of the Dead Sea is
blocked up by the enemy. This
view seems to be favoured by the
next verse (see note). Dr. Weir
suggests that se/a (lit., rock, or col-
lectively rocks) may mean the
whole rocky region in the midst
of which the city of Sela was situ-
ated ; comp. Jer. xviii. 28, ‘Quit

CHAP. Xv1.] ISAIAH. fol

Zion.’ *And it shall come to pass ; like wandering birds, (like)
a scattered nest, shall be the daughters of Moab at the fords
of Arnon. 3‘ Apply counsel, do the work of an umpire, make
as the night thy shadow in the midst of the noon ; shelter the
outcasts, him that wandereth betray not. 4 Let ’ the outcasts
of Moab” sojourn with thee, be thou a shelter unto them
from the face of the destroyer.’ For at an end is the extor-
tioner, finished is the destruction, consumed are the tramplers
out of the land. * And a throne is established through kind-
ness, and there sitteth upon it with faithfulness in the tent
of David one that judgeth and seeketh justice and is prompt
in righteousness.—® We have heard of the pride of Moab:

> So Sept.,
Vowel-points, Del., Naeg.

the cities, and dwell in the rocks’
(sela). Consul Wetzstein also takes
sela collectively ; not however of
the rocky region of Petra, but of
the more northern defiles which
issue in the Dead Sea, especially
those of the Arnon, with their per-
pendicular walls of rock, splendidly
adapted for hiding- places. See
excursus in 3rd ed. of Delitzsch’s
Fesaia.

* We are not informed whether
the counsel in v. I was accepted.
But, at any rate, the daughters of
Moab, i.e. the inhabitants of the
various townships (see Ps. xlviii.11,
‘daughters of Judah,’) collect with
nervous anxiety at the fords of the
Arnon—they prepare, that is, to flee
in the opposite direction to that in-
dicated in xv. 7. For the simile,
comp. Ps. xi. 1, Prov. xxvii. 8.
Nest] i.e., nestlings, as Deut.
Xxxii. IT.

8, 4a An appeal to the humanity
of some neighbouring people, ap-
parently the Jews (see v. 1),
Apply counsel] So Kay. Or,
‘carry into execution that which
has been proposed,’ comp. v. 19,
xlvi. 11 Hebr. (Dr. Weir).
the work of an umpire] i.e., in-
terpose in favour of the Moabites,
and put down their oppressors.
In the midst of the noon] The
glaring Oriental noon, in which it

Pesh., Targ., Lowth, Ges., Hitz., Ew., Weir.—My outcasts, O Moab !

-would be impossible to elude the

ravenous foe.

+ Here the prophet introduces
his own reflection (comp. ii. 30).
The mention of Moab’s ‘ destroyer’
calls up before his mind’s eye a
picture of the blissful change in
store for the theocratic state, when
a great king, of unique gifts and
character, shall have put an end to
the ravages, as disastrous to Judah
as to Moab, of the Assyrian ‘lion’
(xv. 9). The description is tho-
roughly in the style of Isaiah ; see
xxix. 20.

5 A throne] We hardly need to
ask, Whose throne? ‘ Kindness and
faithfulness,’ ‘justice and righteous-
ness’ are, it is true, the pillars of
every divinely prospered king (Prov.
xx. 28, xxix. 14), but here we are
manifestly in the Messianic region
of thought. It is only after judg-
ment has been executed on Assyria,
that the ideal king can be confi-
dently expected (ix. 4-7, xi. I-5,
&c.). ‘Kindness’ is mentioned as
the opposite of ‘ extortion,’ ‘destruc-
tion, and ‘trampling’; ‘faithful-
ness’ means a sincerity which in-
spires confidence. Seeketh jus-
tice] An Isaianic phrase, i. 17.

6 We have heard of Moab’s
pride . . . ] With the largeness of
heart which comes of the ‘ Spirit of
prophecy,’ the writer has expressed

102

ISATAH.

[CHAP. XVI,

proud excecdingly ! his pride, and his haughtiness, and his

overweeningness, the untruth of his pratings.

7 Therefore

shall Moab howl for Moab, he shall howl entirely ; for the
© raisin-cakes of Kir-Hareseth shall ye sigh, utterly downcast.
8 For the fields of Heshbon languish ; the vine of Sibmah—
4its choice plants smote the lords of nations,‘ unto Yazer

© Foundations (i.e., ruins), Pesh., Rashi, Kimchi (not Aben Ezra), Ges.
4 The lords of nations have smitten down its choice plants, Ges., Ew., Naeg.,

Weir.

his firm belief in the ultimate
submission and salvation of Moab.
But alas! the reputation of Moab
for haughtiness and vain preten-
tiousness forbids him to hope that
its conversion will be immediate.
These national characteristics are
well illustrated from the inscrip-
tion on the Moabite Stone. They

evidently had a religious basis,-

Kemosh, the national god, being re-
presented by Mesha as the inspirer
of each of his plans and aggressive
movements. ‘Kemosh said unto
me, Go, destroy Israel!’

7 Moab shall howl for Moab]
A specimen of a not unfrequent
tautology arising from the anti-
thetical tendency of Hebrew style.
Comp. viii. 18, xxiii. 2, Zech. xii. 6,
Gen. xix. 24 (where inattention to
this peculiarity has led even Ewald
into serious error, H/s¢ory of /srael,
ii. 157). The raisin-cakes|
Cakes of pressed grapes seem to
have been the chief commodity of
Kir-Hareseth. The destruction of
the vintage cut off this valuable
source of profit. There may also
be an allusion to the sacrifical feasts
at the vintage, asin Hos. iii. 1. Alt.
rend. may be fairly justified from
Assyrian and Arabic, but is con-
trary to the use of the same word
elsewhere (Hos. iii. 1 same plural
form, comp. 2 Sam. vi. 19, Cant.
ii. 5) Note the weakened reading
of Jer. xlviti. 31, followed by Targ.
and Sept. of Isa. Kir-Hareseth]
or Kir-Heres (v. 11); usually ex-
plained as ‘brick-fortress,’ and iden-
tified with Kir-Moab. Prof. E. H.
Palmer, however, suggests another
meaning. ‘Asking one of the Arabs
where the Moabite Stone was found,

the latter replied that it was “ be-
tween the Adrithein,” i.e., between
the two hdriths. ... On Mr. Pal-
mer’s demanding a further expla-
nation, the Arab pointed out the two
hillocks upon which the ruined vil-
lage of Dhibdnstands. .. Nearly
all the towns in Moab are built
upon similar eminences, and Mr.
Palmer found that they are invari-
ably called Hdriths by the Arabs’
(Athenaum, August 19, 1871).
Sibmah] acc. to St. Jerome was
nearly 500 paces from Heshbon,
which would approximate to the
distance of Siimia, which, with its
tombs and ruined vineyard-towers,
Conder identifies with Sibmah,
(Statement of Pal. Explor. Fund,
1882, p. 9). The place is referred
to on the Moabite Stone, /. 13, as
Seran (for Seban). It was claimed
by the Reubenites, Num. xxxii. 38.
Its choice plants smote. . . }
Such was the strength of the gene-
rous wine of Sibmah. Comp. xxviii.
1, Jer. xxiii. 9, and perhaps Ps.
Ixxviii. 65, and similar expressions
in Greek and Latin. The following
lines describe the extensive culture
of this kind of vine. Its northern
limit was Yazer, its eastern the
sands of the desert, its southern or
western the farther shore of ‘the
sea, i.e., the Dead Sea. For the
words passed over the sea must
surely be taken literally. It was in
a fertile nook on the western bank
of the Dead Sea that En-gedi, so
famous for its vines (Cant. i. 14),
was situated. Byastroke of imagi-
nation the prophet traces the excel-
lence of these to a Moabitish origin.
Jer. xlviii. 32 reads : ‘They reached
unto the sea of Yazer,’ but though

CHAP. XVI.]

ISAIAH. 103

they reached--they strayed into the wilderness, jts tendrils
spread out—they passed over the sea. * Therefore I will weep
with the weeping of Yazer for the vine of Sibmah: I will
water thee with my tears, O Heshbon and Elealeh, for upon
thy fruit-harvest and upon thy vintage the cry hath fallen.
‘0 And taken away is joy and gladness from the garden-land,
and in the vineyards there is no singing, no shouting; the
treader treadeth not wine in the presses ; the cry have I brought

to stillness.

the Heb. yam may mean ‘reservoir,’
(comp. 1 Kings vii. 23), 1t is more
likely that ‘the sea (of) has got in
by accident ; it is omitted in Sept.
of Jeremiah.

® The prophet, as a man, cannot
but sympathise with the mourning
of the Moabites; there is no rhe-
torical artifice in it (as Calv.).
Tne cry hath fallen] Here is a
striking contrast, implied in a single
word. ‘The cry’ (#édad) is pri-
marily the cheerful, musical note
with which the vintagers pressed
out the juice of the grapes (v. I0,
Jer. xxv. 30, &c.). But here it is
the wild shout with which the foe
lays waste the fields and vineyards
so full of promise, or as it is called
in Jer. xlvili. 33, ‘a cheer which is no
cheer.’

10 Singing] The word is inaccu-
rate: it means rather a long-toned
cry (see lii. 8), the Zédad. Comp.
Jer. xxv. 304 (a very striking pas-
sage). Have I brought to
stillness] ‘ They are God’s words.
Amidst all his true and deep human
sympathy, the prophet is still de-
livering a message from God’ (Dr.
Kay).

wry heart] More lit., 4 «ola
pov, Sept. But kota = kap-
dia, as the same word is rendered
by Sept. Cod. Vat., Ps. xxxix. (Heb.
xl.) 8.——Bike the lute] ‘vibrating
with thrills of grief? (Dr. Kay.) The
kinnor, like the xvipn, was used at
mourning ceremonies. Jer. xlvii.
36 substitutes £iala/im, ‘ flutes.’

12 We can hardly suppose that
this verse contains 4 mere repeti-

'' Therefore my heart shall sound like the lute
for Moab, and my bosom for Kir-Heres.

12 And it shall come

tion of the inability of Moab to
save himself by supplication to his
gods. Indeed, this would be incon-
sistent with v. 3, in which the Moab-
ites are represented as throwing
themselves entirely on the merciful
consideration of Judah. The turn
of the phrase itself indicates that a
few words have fallen out of the text.
To render it in the ordinary way
(‘... he shall not prevail’) pro-
duces a mere tautology, for it has
already been said that Moab’s reli-
gious efforts are but a ‘ wearying of
himself” The parallelism, too, re-
quires that as the words ‘when he
appeareth’ are matched by ‘and
cometh to his high place to pray,’
so the words ‘when he wearieth
himself’ should be matched by ‘and
prevaileth not.’ Further, the ten-
der compassion of the prophetic
writer for Moab leads us to expect
that some happier prospect will be
opened than a useless religious
ceremony. Lastly, the idea of con-
version as resulting from a terrible
judgment lies at the very foundation
of Old Testament prophecy. See
also xix. 24, 25, Ixvi. 19-21, Zeph.
iii. 8,9, Jer. xii. 15-17, and espe-
cially xlviii. 12, 13, comp. 47. From
the latter passage, Ewaid has with
great sagacity restored what in all
probability embodies the sense of
the lost apodosis:—‘Then shall
Moab be ashamed of Kemosh his
confidence, and turn unto Jehovah,’
Dr. Weir objects that such an in-
sertion is out of harmony with
what immediately follows. But 1.
the epilogue is, according to Ewald,

104

ISATAH.

[CHAP. XVI

to pass: when Moab appearcth, when he wearieth himself on
the high place, and cometh to his sanctuary to pray, * and
prevaileth not, [then shall Moab be ashamed of Kemosh and
turn unto Jehovah.*]—" This is the word which Jehovah spoke

concerning Moab heretofore.

4 And now Jehovah hath

spoken, saying, In three years, as the years of a hireling, shall
the glory of Moab be disgraced, with all the great multi-
tude, but the remnant ‘in a very little while will I bring unto

honour.f

© So Ew.—That he shall not prevail, Hebr. text.

f So Hoffmann ; Text, (shall be) very small (?), not great.

not by the same hand as the pro-
phecy, and 2. the epilogue, even
without Hoffmann’s correction, does
not contradict the statement of the
inserted passage, that in his ex-
tremity Moab (or the remnant of
Moab) shall turn to Jehovah.
The high place] Bamoth, or ‘high
places,’ is the general term for local
sanctuaries among the Canaani-
tish peoples. The Israelites long
persisted in worshipping at them
(Kings, passim). The Phoenicians
had them also (see the famous
eight-lined Inscription of ’Umm-el-
Awamid); and the Moabites, e.g.,
the stele of King Mesha is called a
bamdah (1. 3, 4).1 The term is ap-
plied not only to the height, whe-
ther natural or artificial, on which
an altar or sacred pillar was gene-
rally speaking erected ; but also to
the altar or sacred pillar without
reference to its position. The stele
of Mesha, for instance, was found
in a depression between the two
hillocks (Adrithein, see on v. 7) on
which the ruins of Diban stand,
and the Israelites had Baméth in
the Valley of Hinnom, Jer. vii. 31.
And prevaileth not] or, ‘and
is not able’ (Ew., Geiger), i.e., is
too full of despair to pray ; but this
ses be ecb. The

. And I made this damah to Kemosh in Qorkhah,

(See crit. note).

national god of the Moabites, but
also the object of worship to other
nations, for the name occurs ina
Pheenician inscription found in
Sicily (Gesenius, Afon. Phen., 159),
also on a stone found by M. Renan
in Phoenicia (Mission de Phénicie,
p. 352), and in a Babylonian name
B.C. 524 (Oppert, Revue archéo-
logique, sept. 1866, p. 166).

13 This is the word] So Isaiah,
XXXViil. 22. Heretofore The
phrase is quite vague, and would
apply equally well to a much earlier
prophecy, or to one of recent date.
In Ps. xciii. 2 it is parallel with ‘from
everlasting,’ but in Isa. xlviii. 7 it
clearly means simply ‘at an earlier
period’; comp. xliv. 8, 2 Sam. xv. 34.

“4 And now Jehovah hath
spoken... ] Not ‘But now,’
as A.V. Isaiah recognises the old
prophecy as a true revelation, and
here supplements it by fuller details.
In three years, as the years
of a hireling] i.e., speedily ; there
will be no grace time (see on vil.
16). The same phrase in xxi. 16.
Shall the glory . d Tho-
roughly Isaianic, see xvii. 3, 4,
xxi. 16; also x. 25, xxix. 17. The
remnant of Moab, like that of
Israel, is the germ of a regenerated
people. See on v, 12.

Cae

esc he delivered me out of alk...

CHAP. XVIL] ISAIAH, 105

CHAPTER XVII.

THE impending ruin of Syria and Ephraim. At first this calamity is de-
scribed as leaving nothing behind, but the second comparison leaves
a door of escape for at least a remnant of Ephraim. Thus, in the pros-
pects of the future, Isaiah steadfastly refuses to identify Israel altogether
with Judah.

The combination of Syria and Ephraim seems unnatural to some critics,
but seems explained by the alliance of Syria and Ephraim, referred to in
vii. 1. Thus we get the end of the reign of Jotham for a ¢erminus a quo
(2 Kings xv. 37); the derminus ad quem is the captivity of Damascus
and Samaria (2 Kings xvi. 9, xvii. 6). No allusion being made to the
siege of Jerusalem, there is no reason to date the prophecy much after
the first-mentioned period. The calmness of its tone contrasts strongly
with the impassioned energy of ix. 8-x. 4; this prophecy is evidently
the fruit of a more meditative mood.

1[Utterance of Damascus.] Behold, Damascus is removed
from being a city, and becometh *a ruin.* ? Forsaken are the
cities of Aroer,® unto flocks shall they belong ; and they shall
lie down, none making them afraid. And the fortress shall
cease from ° Ephraim, and the kingdom from Damascus and
the remnant of Aram—like the glory of the children of Israel

® (See crit. note.) A heap (?), ruin, Hebr. text.
» For ever, Sept., Lo., La, ¢ Aram, Houb., Lo., Gr.

1 Obs. the heading does not en-
tirely cover the contents of the pro-
phecy, at least if Ephraim in v. 3
Is genuine. It is not by Isaiah
(see on xiii. 1). Removed... |
Struck out, as it were, from the list
of cities.

* The cities of Aroer] i.e., the
cities of the trans-Jordanic region,
among which were two named
Aroer. One of these! is referred
to in the Assyrian inscriptions as
Qargara, ‘thrown down, dug up,
burned with fire’ by Shalmaneser
II., and again ‘reduced to ashes
by Sargon’ (A. P. ili. 99, ix. 6).
This particular district ismentioned,
because the Assyrians would pass
through it first on their invasion of
Israel, and these particular cities
because their name (Aroer =‘ the

1 SoG. Smith, 7. S. B A,, ii, 328,
and argé in Chaldce.

laid bare’) was significant of their
fate. It is a short, enigmatical
way of expressing what is said in
full in Jer. li. 58a (see the Hebrew).
Bishop Lowth’s and Lagarde’s em-
endations (based on Sept.) are
plausible but unnecessary, and ef-
face the characteristic paronomasia
‘drey ‘aréer.

3 And the fortress . . . ] Hav-
ing threatened Syria and Israel
separately, the prophet now de-
scribes their common doom. Their
fortresses and independent sove-
reignty shall cease—the prophet
gives the former to Ephraim, and
the latter to Damascus, but he
means that both losses are expe-
rienced in common.——Shall be
like the glory... ] i.e, like
that which is left of the glory of

For the interchange of sounds, comp, ar'@

106 ISAIAII. (CHAP. XVII.

shall they be: an oracle of Jehovah Sabdoth.—‘ And it shall
come to pass in that day; the glory of Jacob shall be en-
feebled, and the fatness of his flesh shall become lean. * And
it shall be as when ‘one gathereth standing corn at harvest,
and his arm reapeth the ears; yea, it shall be as with one
who gathereth ears in the valley of Rephaim. ®And glean-
ings shall be left thereof, as at the striking of an olive-trec,
two or three berries at the uppermost point, four or five on the
branches of the fruit-tree ; an oracle of Jehovah, the God of
Israel. ‘In that day shall the earth-born look toward his
Maker, and his eyes shall have regard to the Holy One of
Israel, ® and he shall not look unto the altars the work of his

4 So Luz., Naeg.—The harvestman gathereth corn, A. E., Kimchi, Vitr., Ges.,

Del., Weir.—The harvest taketh away the corn, Ew.

the Israelites. The meaning of this
is unfolded in the following verses.

1-6 The immediate prospects of
Israel are described under three
figures: 1. that of an emaciated
body ; 2. that of a harvest field ;
and 3. that of beaten olive-trees.

5 His arm reapeth the ears]
‘Ears’ is strictly accurate, as the
Israelites cut off the stalk close
under the ear. Indeed, every word
of the description tells. Its effect
is heightened by its being localised
in the valley of Rephaim, a plain
stretching to the S.W. of Jerusalem,
if, as most suppose, this was a spe-
cially fruitful corn district (though a
comparison of 2 Sam. v. 25 and
Psalm Ixxxiv. 6 may perhaps throw
a doubt upon this).

® A turning-point in the pro-
phecy. Few, indeed, should be left
of the inhabitants, and yet, by God’s
mercy, a few should be left (x. 22 is
just parallel). Thus the doom of
Israel is softened. Contrast the
unbroken threatenings of the pro-

hecy in ix. 8-x. 4. Thereof]
1e., of Jacob. As at the strik-
ing of an olive-tree|. The olive
crop was gathered by beating (Deut.
xxiv. 20), but the technical word
for the beating is not used here.
The ‘striking’ is supplementary to
the ‘beating’; this appears from
xxiv. 13, where it is parallel to ‘the
grape-gleaning, when the vintage

is done,’ But the point of compa-
rison is not the ‘striking,’ but the
fewness of the berries remaining to
be struck.

7.8 The religious revolution
brought about by these calamities.
The earth-born] Implying
that the Israelites have forgotten
the duty which they owe as crea-
tures to the Creator.—— The
altars] viz., those of the deities
next mentioned. Comp. Hos. viii.
II, xX. I, xi. 11. It would be too
subtle to see with Lagarde an im-
plied rebuke of Ahaz (2 Kings xvi.
10-13).

8 The Ashérahs] i.e., the sym-
bols of Ashérah, a goddess wor-
shipped by the Canaanites as the
giver of fertility and good fortune.
The symbol seems to have been a
pole or artificial tree (comp. the
sacred tree in the Assyrian sculp-
tures) ; see Judg. vi. 25, Deut. xvi.
21, where the word for ‘plant’
means simply to set into the ground,
as Eccles. xii. 11, and comp. the
singular rendering of Vulg. 3 Kings
xv. 13.—It must be admitted, how-
ever, that side by side with. the
passages in which Ashérah (first
letter Aleph) is spoken of as one of
the chief deities of Canaan, there
are others in smaller number
which mention Ashtoreth or the
Ashtoreths (first letter Ayin) where
we should have expected Ashérah,

CHAP. XVII]

ISAIAH.

107

hands, and that which his fingers have made he shall not
regard, and the Ashérahs and the sun-images [* he shall break

up.?]

°In that day his fortified cities shall be like the de-

serted places of the Hivites and the Amorites‘’ which they
deserted before the children of Israel; and it shall become a

desolation.
© Not in Hebr. text.

10 For thou didst forget the God of thy welfare,

£ So Sept., Houb., Lo., La. ; the deserted places of forests and hill-tops (?), Ew.,
Del., Naeg., &c. ; that which is left of a forest and a tree-rop, Vitr., Kocher, Ges.

(Comm. ).

see Judg. x. 6 (comp. iii. 7), 1 Sam.
vii. 3, 4, xii. 10. These passages,
however, may be due to a later
editor, in whose time the distinc-
tion between the deities had been
forgotten. At any rate, Ashtoreth
or Astart seems to have been less
popular than Ashérah ; in other
words, the Canaanites felt more
attracted to the feminine side of
the Babylonian Istar (the luxurious
goddess of sensual love) than to
the masculine (the stern god of war),
and even the latter they converted
into a goddess.—As to the deriva-
tion, Ashérah, as Dr. Tiele has
pointed out, is probably the femi-
nine of the Canaanitish god Asher
= Assyr. dsz7, ‘favourable’ (properly
‘straight, even, plain,’ comp. the
Hebrew phrase ‘to smooth the face
of anyone,’ ie., to sue for his
favour), comp. the proper name
S/almanu-asir, ‘Salman is_ kind.’
Another form of the same word is
Asur or Assur, the name of an
Assyrian god and city, and Asurit,
an epithet of the goddess Ishtar.
Dr. Tiele is inclined to identify
Asher and Assur,and the suggestion
is well worth considering. It is, how-
ever, not absolutely necessary to
identify all the deities who received
the titles Asher or Ashérah, any
more than it is to identify all those
who were named Baal.—Against
the view that Ashérah is not the
name of a goddess, but means ‘a
pole,” see Last Words, vol. ii., and
compare Kuenen’s Religion of
Israel, i. 88-93, Tiele, Vergelijkende
Geschiedenis der oude Godsaiensten,
I. i. pp. 462-3, 810, Movers, Dze
Phonizier, li. pp. 561-2. The

sun-images] i.e, the figures of
Baal Khamman, the sun-god, often
spoken of in Pheenician votive in-
scriptions. (Comp. Hebr. AZammah,
‘heat,’ used poetically for the ‘sun.’)
There is a trace of this cultus in
Hammon, the name of a place in
N. Palestine, Josh. xix. 28, 1 Chr. vi.
76. In 2 Chr. xxxiv. 4, these figures
are mentioned as standing on the
altars of Baal. Perhaps they were
modifications of the conical stones,
which, at any rate, among Turanian
peoples, symbolise the generative
power of the sun. Comp. Movers,
Die Phonizter, 1.1. p.411.—A verb
seems wanting at the end of the
verse, as Lagarde points out, unless
with Stade (see his Zettschrift 1882,
p. 12), we regard the closing words
as an intrusive gloss on the fore-
going.

8-11 Here the prophet drops the
subject of the Israelitish penitents.
In xxviii. 5, it is apparently implied
that they were to share the pro-
sperity of the pious kernel of Judah.
Of N. Israel in general it is stated
that its infidelity shall be punished
by a desolation like that which
ancient Canaan experienced at the
hands of the Israelites.—-Desertea
places] i.e. ruins. The text read-
ing is generally defended by 2 Chr.
xxvii. 4, where mountain, country,
and forests, are referred to as the
localities of fortresses. See, how-
ever, crit. note. The decision is

difficult.
10 The Rock ... ] See on xxx.
29, Xxvii. 5. Plants of Adonis].

Comp. on Ixvi. 17. The ordinary
rend. does not give a suitable con-
trast. The Israelites have forsaken

108 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XVIL

and the rock of thy fortress thou rememberedst not, therefore
thou didst plant & plants of Adonis,’ and with vine-slips of a
stranger didst sow it: "in the day of thy planting thou didst
make a hedge, and in the morning didst make thy seed to
blossom—* a harvest-heap"™ in the day of sickness and in-
curable pain.

vu. 12-14. The sudden destruction of the Assyrian army.i— The
three last verses of this chapter seem to have no relation to the foregoing
prophecy, to which they are joined. It is a beautiful piece, standing
singly and by itself ; for neither has it any connection with what follows ;

& Pleasant plantations. Del., Naeg., Weir, &c.
h Fled is the harvest, Ges., Ew., Weir.

their Rock (a religious term), there-
fore they have planted pleasant
gardens. Nor does it suit the im-
mediate context. The term ‘stran-
ger’ in ‘vine-slips of a stranger’ is
most naturally taken as =‘ a strange
god’; comp. on xlili. 12. We are
therefore almost compelled, as Ew.
first saw, to explain the parallel
word (Hebr. za‘amanim) as a Di-
vine title, even if there be no evi-
dence of its being such still extant.
There were so many Divine epithets,
often used by themselves as Divine
names, that it would be no wonder
if some had left few traces. But
we have some presumptive evi-
dence. There is the proper name
Naaman ‘the Syrian’ (2 Kings v.
1), and its Arabian equivalent,
No‘man (the name of a king in
Tebrizi’s scholia to Hamédsa) ;
proper names like these have al-
ways a claim to be interpreted as
Divine titles, if possible. There is
also Nahr Na‘man, the modern
Arabic name of theriver Belus, near
Acco (Acre), which evidently in-
cludes a title of the god Baal (else-
where known as Adoni or Adonis).
Lastly, there is a singular Arabic
name for the red anemone, given in
Lane’s magnificent Lexicon, p. 1578,
shakdiku-n-nomdan, explained first
by Lagarde (following out a hint of
Ewald, History, iv. 86) as ‘the
wounds of Adonis,’ and evidently a

phrase of primitive origin (hence
the word azemone) :—Lagarde well
compares the aiva’AOnvas (Semitica,
p- 32). Classical students will of
themselves illustrate Isaiah’s phrase
by the ‘gardens of Adonis’ (pots or
baskets filled with herbs, which soon
withered in the sun, as Adonis was
killed by the boar), the proverbial
phrase for something which arises
quickly, but does not last. First
mentioned in Plato’s Phedrus, p.
2766. There is, I think, a similar
proverbial application of the Hebrew
phrase included inthemeaning here.
‘How quickly the Adonis-gardens
fade! So quickly shall the devo-
tion of the Israelites to false gods
end in disappointment!’ Such
appears to be the thought of the
prophet. We thus obtain a trace
of Tammuz-worship earlier than
(not to mention Ixvi. 17) Ezek. viii.
17, or even than Jer. xxii. 18,
which probably contains the bur-
den of the Tammuz-dirge——
Sow] Used inexactly for ‘plant.’
1A harvest-heap] ie. the
flourishing plantation shall become
like a heap of reaped corn. As
Hupfeld points out (after Clericus),
‘heap’ (zéd) is used in this special
sense in Ex. xv. 8, Ps. xxxiii. 7,
Ixxviil. 13. So too Del., who com-
pares the use of ‘harvest’ for God’s
Judicial punishment in Hos. vi. 11,
Jer. li. 33. Thus we have in the

' Not that of Rezin and Pckah (Hitzig), see ‘xxix. 5, xxxi. 8, 9, xxxiii. 4, 3, where
the reference to the Assyrians is unquestionable’ (7, C. 4f., p. 93).

CHAP. XVIL] ISAIAH. 109
whether it stands in its right place or not, I cannot say.’ I quite agree
both with what Bishop Lowth here asserts and with what he suggests.
An unforced connection with xvii. I-11 cannot be produced ; and though
most recent critics connect these three verses with chap. xviii. the con-
cluding words of v. 14 are decidedly against this; besides which there are
no phraseological affinities in vv. 12-14 to chap. xviii, and the former
passage describes the ruin of the enemy under an image which is clearly
inconsistent with those in chap. xviii. I venture to place this brief but
well-rounded prophecy during the victorious march of the corps d’ armée
which seems to have been detached by Sennacherib from his main
army at Lachish to force Judah back into allegiance to Assyria. It
seems to have been framed on the rhythmic model of the slightly
earlier prophecy, chap. xviii. and is one of the most vigorous and
picturesque in Isaiah’s works.

12 Ah, the tumult of many peoples, like the tumult of
the seas they are tumultuous; and the uproar of nations,
like the roaring of mighty waters they roar! |The
nations—like the roaring of mighty waters they make an
uproar, but he rebuketh it, and it fleeth far away, and is
chased like the chaff of the mountains before the wind, and
like things that are whirled before the hurricane. ' At
eventide, behold terror! before morning, it is gone! This
is the portion of those who spoil us, and the lot of those

who plunder us,

same prophecy a double application
of the figure of harvest, first to
the Assyrians ‘reaping a harvest
of cities and their inhabitants, and
then to the Israelites ‘ transplanting
heathen gods into their worship,
and reaping God’s abandonment of
their nation as the fruit ’ (Strachey.)

2 Tsaiah on his ‘ watch-tower’
hears, and we seem to hear with
him, the ocean-like roar of the ad-
vancing Assyrian hosts (comp. Ps.
xlvi. 3, 6, Ixv. 7). Full of sympa-
thetic surprise at thetragic spectacle,
he exclaims, Ah! the tumult of
many peoples (alluding to the va-
ried composition of the Assyrian
army). The particle rendered ‘Ah!’
has several meanings, and the con-
text must decide which is to be pre-
ferred. Del. takes it to be expres-
sive here of indignation (as i. 4, x.
1), and in xviii. 1 of pity (as lv. 1).
He rebuketh it] Obs. how

the short clauses crowd upon each
other in sharp contrast to the long-
drawn-out clauses which precede.
So quickly follow the blows of Di-
vine vengeance. The tense in the
Hebr. is the perfect or ‘ fact-tense’
as it may be called. The prophet
is set free from all personal feeling,
and describes the events which loom
as it were bodily before him.—rr]
Or, him; see on v. 26.—The
chaff of the mountains] Thresh-
ing-floors being usually on high
ground, for the sake of the current
of wind 1 Sam. xix. 22 Sept., 2
Sam. xxiv. 18, 2 Chron. iii. 1).

14 The judgment upon the Assy-
rians is to begin in the evening,
and to end before morning in their
complete destruction. Comp. xxix.
7, 8, xxxvii. 36. This is the
portion ...] The solemn judg-
ment of the spectators (comp. Judg.
v. 31).

110 ISAIAII, [CHAP. XVIII.

CHAPTER XVIIL

THE sudden destruction of the Assyrians, and the homage of Ethiopia to
Jehovah. Such is the prophet’s theme, which is worked out in a most
picturesque and dramatic way. The king of Ethiopia, stirred by the
approach of the Assyrians, is sending messengers in the light river-vessels
to spread the news through the empire as rapidly as possible, and to call
together the troops. Shabataka, at this time nominally king of Egypt,
was really much more of an Ethiopian than an Egyptian prince :—he
belongs indeed to the 25th or Ethiopian dynasty. Hence we can account
for Isaiah’s confining his prophecy to Ethiopia, which would be strange
indeed had Egypt been united under a single native king. Isaiah evi-
dently sympathises (as in the case of Merodach-Baladan ; see on xxi.
1-10) with Ethiopia’s hostility to the general enemy, Assyria, and salutes
its people with honourable epithets ; but he regards its anxiety as mis-
placed, for Jehovah is looking on, and will himself interpose at the right
moment. Then, he predicts, with a true intuition of the far-reaching
consequences of the great event, will the distant lands, united under the
sceptre of Ethiopia, recognise the divinity of Jehovah at ‘the place of his
Name’ (comp. I Kings iii. 2) and the scene of the great deliverance—
Jerusalem.—It is sometimes said (e.g. recently by Mr. Hodgkin) that
Tirhakah (Egyptian, Zahuraka) is the name of the Ethiopian king
referred to ; comp. xxxvii. 9, This is against the Egyptian chronology,
if Tirhakah reigned from 693 to 666 (Brugsch). We may either suppose
the late compiler of xxxvi.-xxxix. to have confounded Shabataka with
the better-known Tirhakah, or, with Lenormant, that Tirhakah acted as
general against Sennacherib for his royal father.—Possibly Shabataka
may have sent an embassy to Jerusalem ; this will account for Isaiah’s
graphic description of the Ethiopians’ appearance ; only we must not,
with Ewald, quote v. 2 in behalf of this theory, as the mention of the
Nile-boats confines the scope of the messengers to Ethiopia.’ -Against
the view that the Jews are the nation referred to, which makes the whole
prophecy unintelligible, as well as on Mr. Hodgkin’s theory, see Last
Words, vol. ii.

The prophecy falls into two symmetrical strophes, or paragraphs, each
consisting of three verses of four lines or members each, and followed by
an epilogue in one verse of five lines.

‘Ah! land “of the clang of wings," which art beyond

® So Ges., Del., Weir, Naeg.—Of overshadowing wings, Kay.—Of winged boats,
Sept., Targ., Kimchi, Ew., Merx (on Job xl. 31).

1 ant] Here acry of pity(Del.), be a rhetorical synonym for the
or perhaps rather of sympathy with — buzzing swarms of flies character-
the anxiety of the Ethiopians. istic of Egypt and Nubia (Ex. viii.
The clang of wings] This would 21, 24), which are compared, as in

1 Schrader (A.4.7., p. 406) places chap. xviii. shortly before the series of events
which led to the battle of Raphia (sce Smith, //¢sfory of Assyria, p. 95). There is

CHAP. XVIII.]

ISAIATI. ITI

the rivers of Ethiopia, * which art sending heralds on the sea,
and in vessels of papyrus on the face of the waters! Go, ye
fleet messengers, to the nation * tall and ° polished, to the
people terrible ever since it arose, the ‘strong, strong 4 nation

> Strong, Ges.
© So Del., Weir, Naeg.—Naked, Ges. (Thes.).—Nimble, Ew.—Beautiful, Stade.

4 See below and crit. note.

vii. 18, to the hosts of enterprising
Egyptian and Ethiopian warriors.
Possibly Isaiah may refer to a par-
ticular fly commonly known as the
tsetse, but among the Gallas as the
tsaltsal, a name which closely re-
sembles the Hebr. word forclangour.
This would supply an appropriate
symbol for warriors, as it is the
most dreaded of all the insects of
the interior of Africa. Others have
thought of the sacred beetle, so
familiar a form in Egyptian sym-
bolism, or of a kind of grasshopper
or locust referred to under the name
tseldtsal (‘clangour’) as peculiarly
destructive to vegetation in Deut.
xxviii. 42 (this has also been identi-
fied with the tsetse). Again, seeing
that the Hebr. ¢se/dtsal has also
the meanings of cymbal and har-
poon (=whizzing spear), we may,
if we please, render the phrase
‘winged cymbals’ or ‘winged spears’
(in either case a fit name for the
tsetses). It is the practice in Se-
mitic to add a qualifying word like
‘winged, when a word may be
understood in more than one sense
(see, e.g., xxxvili, 14, Gen. xxxvii.
31). Beyond the rivers of
Ethiopia] i.e., not only Seba or
Meroe (Assyrian AZz/ukhkht), which
is nearly surrounded by rivers, but
the country farther to the south,
which was under the Ethiopian rule
(Del.). The prophet’s object is to
emphasize the greatness of Ethio-
pia, which has dominion over such
distant countries. The remoteness
of Ethiopia seems greatly to have
impressed the Hebrew writers, in

this early stage of geographical
knowledge, see Ps. Ixxii. 10, comp.
8.—There is a remarkable allusion
to this passage in Zeph. iii. 10.

* Meralds| to the various dis-
tricts of the empire. The Sea]
ie., the Nile (as xix. 5, Nah. iii. 8,
see Pusey), still called el-Bahr, ‘the
sea.’ Comp. Sindhu, ‘the sea,’ the
Sanskr. name of the Indus. In
vessels of papyrus], such as are
mentioned under another name in
Job ix. 26, comp. Rawlinson’s Hero-
dotus (on ii. 96), where a picture of
a papyrus-canoe is given; for a
modern parallel, see Last Words,
vol. ii. Pliny (4. MV, vi. 22) repre-
sents these ships as crossing the
sea to the island of Taprobane
(Ceylon), but is evidently mis-
informed. The word here used
for papyrus (géwz) also occurs
in Coptic. The root, however,
seems clearly Hebrew (‘to ab-
sorb’). The native Egyptianname is
Sufi. Go, ye fleet messensers]
The speaker may be either Isaiah
or the king of Ethiopia, but most
probably the former, in accordance
with v. 3. The prophet leaves us
to guess what he would have the
messengers say. The king, their
master, doubtless means them to
give notice of the danger which
threatens the empire, and to call to-
gether the available troops. Isaiah
tacitly consents to the former part
of their message, but not to the
latter; for the next verses assure
us, Jehovah himself will inter-
pose. To the nation tall and
polished . ] Why this accumu-

however, nothing in the chapter itself to suggest this date ; in particular, there is no
allusion to negotiations between Egypt and Ethiopia and the small states of Palestine
—negotiations which drew from Isaiah a by no means complimentary description of
Egypt (xxx. 7, contrast xviii. 2). It is true, chap. xviii. is placed among prophecies of
the reign of Sargon, but this is owing to its subject—the oracles on foreign nations
being placed together.

II2

and all-subduing, whose land rivers °cut through.*

ISAIAI1.

[CHAP. XVIII.

3 All ye

inhabitants of the world and dwellers on the earth, when a
signal is raised on the mountains, look ye ; and when a trum-

pet is sounded, hear ye.

4For thus hath Jehovah said unto me, I will be still and
look on in my mansion, ‘ while there is‘ clear heat in sunshine,
e Despoil, Targ., Vulg., 4 Hebr. MSS., Vitr., Naeg.

f Like, Ew., Weir, Naeg.

lation of minute features, instead of
a simple mention of the name of
the Ethiopians? There is perhaps
a divine irony in the contrast be-
tween the immense preparations of
this great and powerful people and
the ease with which Jehovah, nulli-
fying all human calculations, will
extinguish the pride of Assyria in
a single night (Del.). Isaiah, how-
ever, does not mean to be contemp-
tuous. All ancient writers agree in
their high opinion of the Ethio-
pians. Isaiah has probably met
with ambassadors of this hitherto
unknown race, and mentions the
points that struck him (comp.
Herod. iii. 20, 23, 114).——
Polished] alluding to the appear-
ance of the skin of the Ethiopians.
Herodotus mentions the same cha-
racteristic.——The strong, strong
ration and all-subduing] Isaiah
doubtless alludes to the Egyptian
conquest of Shabaka, the first
king of the 25th or Ethiopian
dynasty of Manetho, and celebrated
for his cruelty to the unfortunate
Bokchoris (Egyptian Bokenranf).
A tradition of the victories of the
Ethiopians has been perpetuated
by Megasthenes (Strabo, xv. 1,
6), who couples Tearco (Tirhdkah)
with Sesostris—The above rend.
is much disputed, but is far the
most probable one. The only rea-
sonable doubt relates to the first
part of it. McGill and Del., for
instance, objecting to an unneces-
sary dma \eyopevor, and to compar-
ingt the Arabic, render literally ‘a
nation of line-line and trampling,’
i.e., ‘a nation that takes possession
of the territories of other nations
and subjugates them’ (McGill), or
taking ‘line’ in the sense of com-

mand (?) as marking out the Zze of
conduct, ‘an imperious and vic-
torious nation’ (Del., Naeg.). But
the reduplication of ‘line’ seems
hardly called for on the former hy-
pothesis, and the meaning given to
‘line’ by Del. is not sufficiently
supported by the stammering
speech of the drunkards in xxviii.
10.——Rivers cut through]Comp.
Herod. ii. 108: karerpyOn 7) Alyur-
ros (Bottcher). The modern Nubia
abounds in rivers and mountain-
torrents (comp. on vw. 1). Canon
Cook, rendering ‘have spoiled,’
sees an allusion to the neglect
into which the dykes and re-
servoirs of Egypt had fallen (see
on xix. 5). But the prophet is not
speaking of Egypt, nor 1s he pic-
turing a period of decline.

3 Assyria is a hostis humani
eneris ; therefore the whole world
is invited to the spectacle of its
overthrow. A signal] This ‘sig-
nal’ is not to be understood as set
up by the Ethiopians, on the watch
against a sudden irruption of the
Assyrians. It is a symbolical ex-
pression for the notice, supernatu-
rally given, of the approach of the
decisive moment. Comp. xi. 10, 12.
For a verbal parallel see xiii. 2.

4 Explanatory. In the midst of
all this excitement, of the Assy-
rians on the one hand, and of the
Ethiopians on the other, Jehovah is
calmly waiting till the fruit of As-
syrian arrogance is all but ripe.
Favouring circumstances are has-
tening the process (clear heat, &c.),
and when perfection seems just
within reach, Jehovah will interpose
in judgment. My mansion]
Hebr. »’koni (see on iv.
Clouds of night mist] Not ‘clouds

CHAP. XIX.]

ISAIAH, 113

‘while there are’ clouds of night-mist in the heat of the
vintage. °For before the vintage, when the blossom is over,
and the bud becometh a ripening grape, he shall cut off the
branches with pruning-knives, and the shoots he heweth
away. © They shall be left together to the birds of prey of
the mountains, and to the beasts of the land, and the birds of
prey shall summer upon them, and all the beasts of the land
shall winter upon it. 7At that time shall a present be
brought unto Jehovah Sabdoth % from the® people tall and
polished, and from the people terrible ever since it arose, the
strong, strong nation and all-subduing, whose land the rivers
divide, to the place of the Name of Jehovah Sabdoth, mount
Zion.
& (Even) the, Hebr. text, Del., Naeg.

iii, 20), but this would not be cor-

of dew,’ which is a contradiction in
rect of either rain or dew. For the

terms. The Hebrew and Arabic

tal is ‘a copious mist shedding
small invisible rain, that comes in
rich abundance every night about
I2 P.M. in the hot weather when
west or north-west winds blow, and
which brings intense refreshment
to all organised life’ (Neil, Palestine
Explored, p. 136). Lane hesitates
whether to call it rain or dew
(Arabic Lexicon, s. v.), but neither
conveys a true impression. ‘The
clouds drop down the ¢a/’ (Prov.

Arabic usage, comp. Korda, Sur.
ii. 267. The vintage may be placed
in August and September.

7 The effect upon Ethiopia. The
text-reading is generally explained
on the analogy of Ixvi. 20, but is
opposed by the parallel line. No-
thing is here said of the conversion
of the Ethiopians (contrast xix. 21,
22).——The place of the Name]
Comp. 1 Kings viii. 17, and note on
XXX. 27.

CHAPTER XIX.

THIS prophecy consists of two parts, vv, 1-15 describing the judgment
impending over Egypt, vv. 16-25 the results of it. The first part falls
into three stanzas or strophes, nearly equal in length; the second into
five paragraphs, each beginning with ‘In that day.’ The first exhibits
a prospect of unmingled glaom; the second admits Egypt, upon its
conversion to the true religion, and Assyria, ta equal privileges with
Israel.

There are great difficulties in the right understanding of this oracle.
Eichhorn actually denied the authorship to Isaiah altogether; and
Ewald, who admits the authenticity, finds a general prolixity and an
occasional peculiarity of expression which distinguish the discourse from
the other writings of Isaiah. The points of contact with the prophet’s
acknowledged works are, however, sufficiently numerous (Gesenius, Coz-
mentar, p. 594) to justify our adherence to the traditional view with

VOL. I. I

114 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XIX,

morc confidence, it is true, so far as vv. I-15 are concerned, than with
regard to the remainder. But it must still be left an open question
whether a disciple of Isaiah has not given the prophecy its present form,
working of course on the basis of Isaiah’s notes.

The Egyptian and Assyrian inscriptions have thrown great light
on the historical references. (1) We have a proclamation of Piankhi
Mer-Amon,' who in the latter part of the eighth century B.c. united
under his sceptre the whole of Egypt and Ethiopia, It appears from
this valuable state-paper that the whole of Lower Egypt was divided
among rival princes, whose connection with their overlord was merely
nominal. One of these, named Tafnekht, revolted, and made himself
master of Lower Egypt. Piankhi, in the inscription, recounts how he
suppressed the revolt. Still the expression a ‘hard lord’ (v. 4) does not
suit Piankhi, who enjoyed a character for clemency, which was only once
stained by his conduct at Memphis (Inscr. line 96). The chief value of
his inscription is the evidence which it supplies of the imperfect centrali-
sation of the government of Egypt, and of the civil wars which from time
to time resulted. It is clear, however, that many of the petty princes
remained in undisturbed possession of their fiefs, so that upon any serious
disaster happening to the supreme power, the old evil of anarchy would
at once show itself. (2) From inscriptions of Sargon (Smith, Assyrian
Canon, pp. 125-6), we learn that in 720 B.c. he defeated Sibahki (the
Egyptian king Shabaka), at the battle of Raphia. It is possible that
Isa. xix. was written on the arrival of this news. Isaiah was doubtless
sufficiently well acquainted with the previous history of Egypt to know
that the loosening of the central authority meant the revival of the local
chieftainships and incipient auarchy. He might also well suppose (for of
course the ‘spirit of prophecy’ does not exclude natural means of know-
ledge) that Sargon would, either now or later, follow up his advantages
and display his natural ‘hardness’ or cruelty in the subjugation of
Egypt. All that was revealed to him was that Egypt should be shaken
to its centre; the precise time and instrument of this were hidden from
him. As a matter of fact, the conquest of Egypt, at least of Upper
Egypt,? was reserved for Esar-haddon in 672, who divided the country
into twenty small tributary kingdoms. (3) It is not impossible that
Isa. xix, may refer to this event (the conquest by Esar-haddon)—see
Smith, Azs/ory of Assyria, p. 135; Assurbanipal, pp. 15, 16. If so, it will
fall into the old age of Isaiah, who would be about 90 (assuming 762 for
his birth-year). We might also ascribe it to a disciple of Isaiah.
Either supposition will account for the pale reflection which it gives of
the grand Isaianic style.

The Isaianic authorship of vv. 16 (or 18)-25 is questioned. So much
at least is self-evident, that they must have been written later than
the rest of the chapter :—the prophecy is, from a literary point of

1 See R. P., ii. 79-104, and a series of articles by De Rougé and Lenormant, in the
Revue archéologigue, 1871-73. Also Canon Cook's The Juscription of Pianchi Mer-
Amon (Lond. 1873), and Brugsch’s translation in his Geschichte Aegyptens, pp.
68-707.

LR P., i. 61 (Annals of Assurbanipal).

CHAP. XIX.] ISALAH. 15

view, complete without them, and the tone of prophecy and appendix is
entirely different. Of course, Isaiah may have added these verses on a
later revision of his works—and indeed we can hardly imagine a more
‘swanlike end’ for a dying prophet ; or some later writer—it may be a
disciple of Isaiah’s—also in his degree a prophet, may have been their
author. We know, as a matter of fact, that prophecy becomes more
minute, more circumstantial, the further we go from the age of Isaiah, so
that it would not be an audacious conjecture that a prophet considerably
more recent than Isaiah made this addition. Gratz suggests the author
(or one of the authors) of the latter part of Zechariah (comp. Zech. xiv.),
which on purely philological grounds must be separated from the former.
Others (Ges., Hitz, Merx, Oort) seem to themselves to discover allusions
to the age of the Maccabees, when Judaa was for the time independent,
and when Egypt and Syria (here, according to them, called Assyria) were
equally powerful. The time of the Maccabees, it is urged, also accounts
for the prediction in vw. 18, ‘One shall be called Sun-city,’ which was
framed (ex hyfoth.) in order to justify the erection of a temple at Leonto-
polis (in the nome of He/Zofolis) by Onias 1V., about 160 B.c.! The
successes obtained soon afterwards by the Jews might, it is urged, en-
courage the formation of such extravagant hopes, and the friendly alliance
between the three nations in v. 23 corresponds to the fact related in
1 Macc. a. 51-66 (see Hitzig’s powerful argument, Jesaza, pp. 219, 220).

The verses are no doubt peculiar, but we have no right to ascribe
them to the time of the Maccabees simply on the ground of the question-
able reading ‘ /r ha-khéres, Sun-city, and the questionable interpretation
‘Asshur’ = Syria (see on vv. 18-23). Knobel has already indicated
points of contact between the disputed verses and the acknowledged pro-
phecies of Isaiah ; nor are the ideas radically inconsistent with those of
the acknowledged prophecies of Isaiah (comp. ii. 3, xvi. 12 (?), xvili. 7),
though no equally ‘ catholic’ passage can be quoted. One feature in the
description, moreover, points decidedly to a time when the Deuteronomic
laws were not known, or at any rate not observed,—that of the mag¢ébah
or pillar unto Jehovah (see on v. 19). Note also that Assyria and Egypt
are the powers hostile to Israel in vv. 23-25, as in xi. 11-16.

The site of the Egyptian-Jewish temple is placed by tradition at Tel.
el-Yahoodeh, ‘the Mound of the Jew,’ about 20 miles from Cairo, on the
Suez line; and this is probably correct. See Hayter Lewis in Zrams. Soc.
Bibl. Arch. 1881, pp. 177-191, and comp. Sayce in Pat. Fund Quarterly
Statement, 1880, pp. 136-8.

1[Utterance of Egypt.] Behold, Jehovah rideth upon a
swift cloud, and cometh to Egypt, and the not-gods of Egypt

1-11 Threatenings. Propheticper- a cherub, and did fly’—for the
fects in the Hebrew. ‘cherub’ is a form of speech re-

1 Rideth upon a swift cloud] tained from myth-making times, and
Comp. Ps. xviii. 10: ‘He rodeupon meaning the storm-cloud. Child-

1 Josephus (Axz¢., xiii. 3, 1 ; Wars, vii. 10, 3) makes Onias appeal to the predic-
tion in Isaiah of an Egyptian temple to be built to Jehovah, but without referring to
the phrase ‘city of the sun.

12

116

ISAIAH. [CHAP. XIX,

shall shake before him, and the heart of Egypt shall melt
within it. ? And I will “spur Egypt against Egypt, and they
shall fight every one against his brother and every one against
his fellow, city against city and kingdom against kingdom,
3 And the spirit of Egypt shall be made empty within it ; and
its counsel will I annihilate; and they shall resort to the
not-gods, and to the mutterers, and to those who have familiar
spirits, and to the wizards; *and I will shut up Egypt into
the hand of a hard lord, and a fierce king shall rule over them
—the oracle of the Lord, Jehovah Sabdoth.

5 And the waters shall dry up from the sea, and the River
become parched and dry ; ®and the rivers shall stagnate, the

= Arm, Ges., Ew.

like language to childlike men.
Tho not-gods of Egypt. . . | So
Ex. xii. 12: ‘And against all the
gods of Egypt I will execute judg-
ment.’

2? Egypt against Egypt] One
canton or one province of Egypt
against another (see Introd.).

3 The mutterers] viz., of sacred
formule ; or perhaps they were ven-
triloquists, who imitated the voice of
the shades. Comp. on viii. 19——
The wizards] Magic was held in
great honour in ancient Egypt,
and magical books abound. The
standard work on the subject is
M. Chabas’ Le Papyrus magigue
Hfarris (1866). Comp. on v. Il.

4 @ hard lord] The description
suggests a complete stranger to the
culture of Egypt, ie.. an Assyrian
rather than Ethiopian conqueror.
Piankhi, moreover, was Egyptian
by race (see Introd.).

5 The drying up of the Nile,
and the death of vegetation. The
verse recurs in Job. xiv. 11, where
the special reference to the Nile
is dropped.t—The sea] i.e., the
Nile (see on xviii. 2), or more
strictly the Pelusiac stream (ac-
cording to Sharpe, //ésfory of
Egypt, 1%, 138). Canon Cook
calls attention to the fact that

great trouble was caused by the
neglect of the dykes and reservoirs
during periods of civil disorder (cf.
Herod. ii. 137). ‘The complete
overthrow of the Ethiopian dynasty
was naturally followed by a recur-
rence of the old evil, which was at
length, after many years, arrested
by the energetic measures of Psam-
metichus, described by Diod. Sic.
i. 66’ (Cook, Juscription of Pianchi
Mer-Amon, p. 14).

8 The canals] Hebr. rim; see
on xxxili. 21. The maintenance of
the canals (on which see Herod. ii.
108, and Sir G. Wilkinson’s note
ad loc. in Rawlinson) was essential
to the fertility of the soil, and has
ever been a test of good govern-
ment in Egypt.——Egypt] Or,
the Fortified Land (and so xxxvii.
25, Mic. vii. 12). Ewald, Distress-
land, but nothing in the context
suggests this (contrast Zech. x. 11).
The Hebr. Magor (=Ass. Mugur)
is simply an uncommon equivalent
of A/i¢ratm (the same root with the
local termination in -az7,' like Eph-
raim, Mahanaim, Jerushalaim, Se-
pharvaim). It is not an Egyptian
word, but one of its meanings in
Hebr. is fortification (see Ps. xxxi.
22). Hence Ebers thinks it origin-
ally meant Lower Egypt, which was

' | agree with Friedr. Del. (Paradies, p. 309) that Afi¢raim has nothing to do with
Upper and Lower Egypt, but (with E. Meyer) prefer to explain the -a/m as above,

and not to correct it, with Friedr. Del., into -z7,

to me unfounded.

His scepticism as to AZagor seems

CHAP. XIX] ISAIAH. 117

canals of Egypt shall become shallow and parched up, reed
and papyrus shall waste away. ™The meadows by the Nile,
by the shore of the Nile, and every seed-plot by the Nile,
shall dry up and vanish away, and be no more. *And the
fishers shall sigh, and all who cast hook into the Nile shall
mourn, and those who spread nets on the face of the waters

shall languish.

be ashamed, and those who weave white cloths,

® And those who prepare coinbed flax shall

10 And its

pillars shall become broken in pieces, and all those who work
for hire (?) shall be grieved in soul.
" Utter fools are the princes of Zoan; the wisest coun-

sellors of Pharaoh—senseless counsel !

How can ye say unto

Pharaoh, A son of the Wise am I,a son of ancient kings?

protected by a wall across the isth-
mus of Suez, and that it was after-
wards extended to Upper Egypt by
the conquering Hyksos, when they
found that Egypt was much larger
in extent than the region protected
by the wall (Ebers, Aegyften, i. 88).
Brugsch, however, thinks Macor
meant originally the district of Zoan
or Tanis, which occasionally bears
the name in Egyptian (Semitised,
I suppose) of Za mazor, ‘the for-
tified land’ (Gesch. Aegyptens, 189).
——Papyrus] Hebr. swf, from the
Egyptian uf. A Hebr. term is
used in xviii. 2.

7 The meadows] Which were
proverbial for luxuriant vegetation
(comp. Gen. I. 11). Shore] Lit.
mouth. Comp. Gen. xli. 3, ‘lip (ie.
shore) of the Nile.” A more com-
plete parallel is wanting.——van-
ish away] Lit. be chased away
(like chaff, xvii. 13). A vivid word-
picture of the re-assimilation of the
narrow oasis of the Nile to the arid
desert which hems it in,

8 The fisherman’s occupation is
gone. Fish abounded in the Nile
(Herod. ii. 93), and was much eaten
(Num. xi. 5). To the priests, how-
ever, it was unclean, on the ground
of certain sacred legends (Pierret).

®°-who prepare combed flax]
Specially for the priests’ clothing,
and for the mummy-cloths. That
the Egyptian byssus = flax was
proved by the microscopic observa-

tions of Bauer (Classical Museum,
vi. 152, &c.).——White cloths]
Probably including cotton.

10 All classes, high and low, are
in consternation.—The pillars]
Comp. Ezek. xxx. 4, Ps. xi. 3, Gal.
ii. 9. (I doubt if the text of the
second half of this verse is right.)

vv. 11-15 describe, not merely
the perplexity of the Egyptian
statesmen when the calamities have
come, but the folly which ac-
celerated their coming. The
princes] ie., the king and his
priestly counsellors. ‘ Books con-
taining magic formule belonged
exclusively to the king; no one was
permitted to consult them but the
priests and wise men, who formed
a council or college, and were called
in by the Pharaoh on all occasions
of difficulty.’ Cook (note on Ex.
vii. 11).—Zoan] The S‘an of the
present day, with immense heaps
waiting to be explored. It was a
frontier-city in the Delta (the Greek
Tanis), and was sometimes called
Rameses, but is not to be con-
founded with the Rameses from
which the Israelites started. In
Isaiah’s time it was still important,
though verging on its decline.
How can ye say unto Pharoah
. .. [ ‘With what reason can you
boast, as you do, of belonging to a
royal class’ (the Pharaohs belong-
ing to the priestly class, either by
birth or by adoption) ?

118 ISAIAH, [CHAP. XIX,
Where are they, then, thy wise men? Let them, I pray,
announce unto thee, and let them know what Jehovah Sabdoth
hath purposed upon Egypt. ' Become foolish are the princes
of Zoan, deceived are the princes of Noph; those have led
Egypt astray who are the corner-stone of its tribes. 14 Jeho-
vah hath mixed into it a spirit of perverseness, so that they
have led Egypt astray in all his doing, as a drunken man

strayeth about in his vomit.

15 Neither shall there be for

Egypt any deed which the head and the tail might do, the

palm branch and the rush.

%In that day shall Egypt be like women, and shall
tremble and shudder, because of the swinging of the hand of

Jehovah Sabaoth, which he swingeth against it.

'2 The first proof of the ‘ folly ’
of the wise men. They cannot
predict the nature or the course of
events in this ominous period.
Prediction became a favourite oc-
cupation of Egyptian religious
writers in the Ptolemzean period
(Révillout, Revue céeyptologique,
1880, p. 145, &c.), and this may
possibly have begun at an even
earlier date. Certainly Herodotus
tells us of Egyptian oracles. The
so-called ‘ prophets,’ however, ‘who
were generally priests of the tem-
ples, had the management of the
sacred revenues, were bound to
commit to memory the contents of
the ten sacerdotal books, and di-
rected the details of ritual and cere-
monial according to the prescribed
formule’ (Rawlinson, ZgyAz,i.434).

13 A second proof. They had led
Egypt astray by their infatuated
conduct of affairs. Woph] i.e.,
not the distant Nap or Napata (the
Ethiopian capital), but Memphis, the
most ancient of all the great cities
of Egypt, called in the inscriptions
ALen-nufr, or ‘the good abode” In
Hos. ix. 6 called Moph. The
corner-stone] Applied collectively
to the whole priestly class. Comp.
Zech. x. 4, Judg. xx. 2, 1 Sam. xiv.
38. The Egyptian word seabet is
applied in the same way. (Renouf,
Academy, Jan. 9, 1875). Tribes]
i.€., castes, or rather classes.

The origin of this strange con-

'7 And the

fusion is traced to Jehovah.
Mixed] i.e., poured out a drink of
mixed ingredients. —& spirit of
perverseness] Or, of subversion.
The opposite of ‘a firm spirit, Ps.
li. 10 (12). Comp. on xxxvii. 7.

1° The verse is slightly obscure.
It either says that neither high nor
low will be able to effect anything
(taking ‘and’ = or), or, which better
suits ‘for Egypt,’ that the general
disunion will prevent any truly
national enterprise (taking ‘and’
= with, as vii. 1). For the figure,
head and tail, &c., see on ix. 14.

16 In that day] On the arrival
of the foe ?. The swinging... ]
See on xxx. 32.

11 Phe land of Judah shall be-
come a terror] Why? Because
it is Jehovah’s seat of empire.

18-25 Promises. The grand subject
of this epilogue (with which comp.
xxiii, 15-18) is the turn in the for-
tunes of Egypt consequent upon its
submission to Jehovah (so Jer. xlvi.
26). The transition is abrupt ; we
have passed at a bound into the
Messianic period. The abruptness
might perhaps be an argument
against the Isaianic authorship of
these verses, were it not (1) for the
prophetic custom of representing
the final droxardaraois or ‘restitu-
tion’ as following immediately upon
the then existing crisis, and (2) for
Isaiah’s fondness for painting a
cheerful background to his gloam-

CHAP. XIX.]

ISAIAH.

119

land of Judah shall become a terror unto Egypt ; whosoever
> maketh mention of it, unto him they turn shudderingly,° be-
cause of the purpose of Jehovah Sabdaoth, which he purposeth

against it (Egypt).

bd (Lit...
Recalleth it to mind, shuddereth, Ew.

iest descriptions.—The prediction
was not altogether devoid even of
human verisimilitude. Long ago,
under the 18th dynasty (17th cent.
B.C.), in consequence of the Syrian
campaigns of the Pharaohs, so
many Semitic words passed into
Egypt that some texts of this period
(e.g. the Anastasi papyrus) are
scarcely more than half-Egyptian in
vocabulary ; and apart from this,
the population of Lower Egypt, near
the frontier, was at least half-Semi-
tic (i.e., Canaanitish), and its idioms,
manners, and modes of thought
must have constantly influenced
those of the pure Egyptians. The
political history of Palestine assisted
this Semitising process. Weknow
from Jeremiah (xliv. 1) that many
Jews found refuge in Lower Egypt
after the fall of Jerusalem, and it is
a mere accident that we have no
earlier notice of similar displace-
ments caused by the Assyrian inva-
sions. One of the towns mentioned
by Jeremiah as the seat of a Jewish
colony is Migdol, and it appears
that this pure Hebrew name had
been selected by the Egyptians
themselves under the form Maktal.
It is noteworthy, too, that one of the
names, in the Inscription of Pian-
chi, viz., Zadkhiau, is not impossibly
the Egyptian form of Zedekiah (so
Canon Cook). Comp. De Rougé, Re-
wue archeol. viii. 127, &c.; Brugsch,
History of Egypt, chap. ‘xi, ; Mas-
pero, Rev. arch. 1878, p. 168,
Histoire ancienne, prem. éd., p. 338.

18 Five cities in the land of
Egypt... ] Is this to be taken
literally? Vitringa and Hitzig
think so ; and it is quite true that
the Heliopolite nome continued to
be inhabited by Jews till a late
period, one evidence of which is
the name Tel-el-Yahoodeh given to
various mounds besides that re-

18 In that day there shall be five cities in
. he shuddereth. )—Mentioneth it unto him, he shuddereth, Ges., Del.—

ferred to above. But it would be
strange if a prophecy which begins
with such an absence of prosaically
minute predictions (comp. Naeg.
on vv. 2-4) should close with such
remarkably circumstantial antici-
pations. If, therefore, v. 18 is to
be taken literally, we shall have to
accept the theory that the passage
(and all belonging to it) is a later
addition, It is well known, how-
ever, that five, the half of ten, was
a favourite round number both with
the Egyptians (see Ebers. on Gen.
xliii. 34) and with the Jews (xxx.
17, xvii. 6, Lev. xxvi. 8, 1 Cor. xiv.
19). The prophet may therefore
only mean that there shall be a
number, just large enough to be
appreciable, of Egyptian civic com-
munities (not merely Hebrew colo-
nies, as Lenormant, see end of
verse), speaking the tongue of
Canaan (i.e, Hebrew, see on
xxxvi. 11). These latter words
probably mean that Hebrew shall
become the language of sacred
forms and ceremonies in these ‘five
cities,” which of course would be
the natural result of their conver-
sion to Jehovah (comp. Zech. xiv.
9). Granting, therefore, that the ex-
pectation of conversions on a large
scale to the true religion is in har-
mony with the rest of the acknow-
ledged prophecies of Isaiah, there
is nothing in the form of this verse
to preclude its Isaianic origin.
Swearing to Jehovah Sabdéoth]
Not ‘swearing by’ (as Ixv. 16), but
‘swearing (fidelity) to’ (as xlv. 23).
One shall be named] A phrase
which constantly introduces a title
descriptive of character ; see 1. 26,
iv. 3, lx. 14, Ixii. 4. If, however,
we read the following words, ‘ City
of the sun,’ this cannot be its in-
tention here ; we must take it as
simply equivalent to ‘shall be’

ISATAH, [CHAP. xIx.

120
the land of Egypt, speaking the tongue of Canaan, and swear-
ing to Jehovah Sabdoth ; one shall be named ° City of destruc-
tion. In that day there shall be an altar to Jehovah in the
midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar by its border to
Jehovah ; *° and it shall be for a sign and a witness to Jehovah

© So most MSS. and editions, Massora (but see Geiger, Urschrift, p. 79), Peshito,
City of the sun, 15 MSS. in text, rin marg. (Kenn., and_de Rossi), Symm , Vulg.,
Saad., Talmud (‘ Menachoth, 110a), Rashi, Vitr., Ges. (Thesaurus, but not

Comm.), Hitz., Naeg. City of righteousness, Sept., Geiger.

But where is there an analogy for
this ? —-- City of destruction]
‘There is great doubt whether the
reading should be ‘/r ha-héres
(adopted here), or ‘/r ha-khéres
‘City of the sun.’ The main objec-
tion to the latter is that it is not
at all suitable for a honorific title
conferred bya Jewish prophet. An
Assyrian might have written thus
(comp. 2. P., ix. 24), but not a
Jewish prophet. The attempts that
have been made to provide a better
meaning for ‘/r ha-khéres are ex-
tremely rash.—The_ text-reading
has been well explained by Targ.,
which has ‘the city of Bethshe-
mesh (=the house of the sun)
which is to be laid waste.’_In other
words, the prophet intends Helio-
polis, but modifies the form of the
first letter to indicate the pious zeal
for the religion of Jehovah which
shall one day inspire its Egyptian
inhabitants. It is as if he would
sty, No longer ‘city of the false
god of the sun,’ but ‘city of the
breaking down of idolatrous altars.’
(It is the word used for Gideon’s
breaking down of the altar of Baal,
Judg. vi. 25.) Comp. Jer. xl. 13,
‘He shall break the (idolatrous)
pillars of the house of the sun,’ ie.,
the great temple in Heliopolis. A
similar allusive transformation of
the native Egyptian name An (pro-
nounced by the Jews On) is made
by Ezekiel (xxx. 17), ‘The young
men of Aven (= “nothingness,” or
“ wickedness”) shall fall by the
sword. So Secker (af. Lowth),
Caspari, Herzfeld, Drechsler, Del.
19 A further development of v.
18. The ‘five cities’ shall erect an
altar to Jehovah, It is not quite

certain how this is to be under-
stood. It depends on our decision
of certain preliminary questions.
If Isaiah wrote these verses, and if
Deuteronomy was written after his
time, the altar say have been in-
tended as an altar of sacrifice, in
accordance with the primitive law
in Ex. xx. 24 (2. P. B.). If, how-
ever, these verses were written after
the composition of Deuteronomy
(whether Mosaic or not), then we
must suppose that the altar was
merely an ‘altar of witness,’ on the
principle set forth in Josh. xxii. 23,
24. Or again, the description may
be purely symbolical. For this we
have a striking analogy in Mal. i.
11, which describes how ‘in every
place’ among the Gentiles ‘ incense
is offered unto the name of Jeho-
vah, and a pure meal-offering,’
where the symbolical meaning is
indicated by the context. And
a pillar by its border] In
primitive times a pillar (Heb.
maccébah) was the distinguishing
mark of a holy place. Idolatrous
pillars were commanded to be de-
stroyed (Ex. xxili. 24), but most
critics think that ‘pillars’ to Jeho-
vah were quite allowable till the
time of Hezekiah or Josiah, to
which they assign the Book of
Deuteronomy (comp. Deut. xvi. 21,
22). At any rate, the prophet gives
an implicit sanction to the erection
of a sacred pillar in Egypt. ‘By
its border,’ to indicate that the
whole land belonged to Jehovah.
20 The altar and obelisk are a
sign and a witness to God as well
as to man, viz., of the covenant
now existing between Jehovah and
his sworn servants (v. 18), the

CHAP. XIX,] ISAIAH. 121

Sabdoth in the land of Egypt: when they shall cry unto
Jehovah because of oppressors, he shall send them a deliverer
and an advocate, and shall rescue them. ?! And Jehovah shall
make himself known to Egypt, and the Egyptians shall know
Jehovah in that day, and shall serve with sacrifice and offering,
and shall vow a vow unto Jehovah, and shall perform it.
#2 And Jehovah shall smite Egypt, smiting and healing ; and
when they return unto Jehovah, he shall receive their suppli-
cations, and shall heal them. ** In that day there shall be a
highway from Egypt to Assyria; Assyria shall come into
Egypt, and Egypt into Assyria, and the Egyptians shall

serve with the Assyrians.

Egyptians. Hence, if some great
or petty king should again attempt
to ‘oppress’ Egypt, Jehovah will
send a ‘deliverer,’ as he does to
his ancient people (same word in
Judg. iii. 9, 15, iv. 3, Obad. 21).

21 and Jehovah shall make
himself known... . ] Especially
by answering their prayers (v. 20).
They on their side recognise him for
their God by offering sacrifice—
whether on the altar mentioned in
v. 20, or at Jerusalem, is not stated ;
but the latter is suggested by the
parallel passage, Zech. xiv. 16-19.
Obs., the ‘five cities’ have here
expanded into ‘the Egyytians.’
Possibly the former were the ‘rem-
nant’ which survived God’s ter-
rible visitation, and was to become
the ‘seed’ of a regenerate nation
(comp. vi. 13).

*2 The prophet returns to the
period of calamity which is to pre-
cede the conversion of the Egyp-
tians. Egypt shall be smitten, but
with a view to its being healed.
For the antithesis, comp. Deut.
xxxli. 39, Hos. vi. 1, Job v. 18, and
for the important idea thus ex-
pressed, Zeph. iii. 8, 9, Jer. xii. 15-
I

*8 The first consequence of this
wonderful conversion is the cessa-
tion of war between the once rival
countries of Egypt and Assyria.
The mention of Assyria confirms
the view that the ‘hard lord’ is
an Assyrian king.—Of course, this

*4Tn that day shall Israel be a

prophecy presupposes that the As-
syrians have also been converted
(see on x. 20), and one cannot help
regretting that no more distinct
revelation on the subject is still

extant. A highway] i.e., an
uninterrupted passage through
Palestine. The Egyptians

shall serve with the Assyrians. |
The sense of the word rendered
‘serve’ is clear from v. 21. No
Israelite could misunderstand the
phrase any more than the term
‘knowledge’ for ‘ knowledge of Je-
hovah’ in Hos. iv. 6. To render,
therefore, with Hitzig, ‘Egypt shall
(resign itself to) serve Assyria’ (or,
as he explains it, Syria), is arbitrary,
though Sept., Targ., Pesh., Vulg.,
thoughtlessly give this rendering.
How could there be an empire,
whose head in political matters was
Assyria, and in religious Judea?
A strange retrogression of the
Messianic belief !—Hitzig’s expla-
nation of Asshur as = Syria is with-
out authority. No doubt Asshur
could be and was used of a power
which succeeded to the place of
Assyria, such as Persia (see Ezra
vi. 22), but not of an inferior power,
such as Syria. In Ps. Ixxxiii. 8 (9)
Assyria cannot =Syria, because it
is only mentioned in the second de-
gree of Israel’s enemies (‘ Assyria
also? are the Psalmist’s words).
Lagarde, moreover, plausibly reads,
not Asshur, but Geshur.

* But a third factor is stiil want-

122 ISAIAH. [CHAP. Xx,

third to Egypt and to Assyria, even a blessing within the
earth, *4forasmuch as4 Jehovah Sabdaoth hath blessed him,
saying, Blessed is my people Egypt, and the work of my
hands Assyria, and mine inheritance Israel.

4 Wherewith, Ew.

ing to complete the harmony, viz.,
Israel. These three, Egypt, Assy-
ria, Israel, have been divinely pre-
pared to become a blessing within
the earth (‘within,’ ie., ‘within
the entire compass of,’ not merely
‘in the midst of’—blessing is to
stream forth from them in all di-

25 Wath blessed him] viz., each
of the three countries. Obs. Israel,
as the central point of ‘blessing,’
still retains a certain pre-eminence.
He is Jehovah’s ‘ inheritance ’—the
phrase does not occur again till the
second part of Isaiah (xlvii. 6, Ixiii,
17), as Dr. Weir points out.

rections, comp. Gen. xii 24, 36).

CHAPTER XX.

ISAIAH, in the habit of a captive, a sign for Egypt and Palestine.

The renascence of Egyptian prosperity under Shabaka (the So, or
rather Seve, of 2 Kings xvii. 4) was but of short duration. The disas-
trous battle of Raphia (B.C. 720) not only compelled ‘ Rahab,’ the Insolent
One, to acknowledge the supremacy of Assyria, but again destroyed the
dream of Egyptian unity. Tanis, Bubaste, Khnensa, and Sais, each be-
came the residence of a petty king ; Shabataka, the son of Shabaka, was
forced to content himself with Thebes and the ‘nomes’ in its immediate
vicinity.?

It was not likely that so disunited a country could be of any real use
to Judah. And yet it appears from this chapter, compared with chaps.
\XX,, XxxL, that negotiations were actually entered into between the courts
of Palestine (especially that of Judah) and those of Egypt. The danger
from Assyria must indeed have been urgent to have suggested so preca-
rious an auxiliary, and Isaiah, whose faith in Jehovah kept him free from
all political illusions, lost no opportunity of counteracting such a policy.
‘The special occasion of the prophecy in chap. xx. is revealed to us by the
Assyrian inscriptions. Two different texts? relate to the siege of Ashdod
here so briefly referred to ; according to one (the Kouyunjik inscription),
it happened in the ninth year of the reign of Sargon, ie, B.C. 711;
according to another (the Annals), in the eleventh, i.e., B.c. 709. It is
certain, however, that the siege was the consequence of a change of
political parties in the town of Ashdod. A temporary advantage had
been given to the Assyrian party by the interference of Sargon, who,
some time after the battle of Raphia, deposed the rightful king Azuri, on
a charge of rebellion, and enthroned his brother Akhimit in his place.
The ruling class, however, were predominantly anti-Assyrian, and deposed

1 Maspcro, Hésto/re ancienne de l' Orient, cd. x, p. 398.
2G. Smith, Assyrdan Déscoves ies, p. 293.

CHAP. XX.] ISAIAH, 123
Akhimit, setting up one Yavan as king. The consequence was the
siege of Ashdod referred to by Isaiah, which ended in the deportation
of the inhabitants to Assyria.—The same cylinder-inscription which re-
lates the siege of Ashdod gives a list of the nations which incurred
the same guilt of treason, and among them appears the name of Judah
(see on v. 6).

Thus Isaiah had good reason, on political as well as religious grounds,
to dehort the Jews from an Egyptian alliance. His ill success was re-
venged by the invasion and subjugation of Judah, to which I have referred
in the introduction to x. 5-xii. The conquest of Egypt, however, which
Isaiah here holds out in prospect, did not immediately take place. The
war with Merodach-Baladan, king of Babylon, prevented Sargon from
invading Egypt, and the nominal king of Egypt and Ethiopia (Shabataka),
sent an embassy to Sargon desiring peace.!

It seems to me very doubtful whether vv. 1, 2 can have been written
by Isaiah, as v. 1 implies a confusion of two distinct sieges of Ashdod
(see on v. 3). The former reminds us strongly of chap. vii. Both
chapters have probably been worked up on the basis of notes of Isaiah’s
prophecies, and some historical traditions of the life and acts of Isaiah.

‘In the year when the Tartan came to Ashdod, when
Sargon king of Assyria sent him (he warred against Ashdod
and took it), ?at that time spoke Jehovah by Isaiah son of
Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins,

passage supplements Sargon's own

1 The Tartan] The official de-
account of the siege, for this king,

signation of the general-in-chief of

the Assyrian army ; properly Tur-
tanu. He was the second personage
in the empire, the constitution of
Assyria being essentially military.
There is, therefore, no reason to
identify this Tartan with the one
in 2 Kings xviii, 174—Sargon]
This Sargon was called Sargon the
Later, to distinguish him from
another king (Sargina) who reigned
in Babylonia several centuries
earlier. The name is, properly,
Accadian, and therefore non-Se-
mitic; but the Assyrians, who
Semitised it into Sarru-kinu, may
have given it the meaning ‘true
(or, faithful ; or established) king.’
Sargon himself offers an interpret-
ation; see crit. note, vol. il.
‘He warred against Ashdod
... J] Told by anticipation,
comp. the parenth, in vii. 1.
The command to Isaiah was of
course prior to the capture. This

in accordance with the Assyrian
custom, takes the credit of the cap-
ture of Ashdod to himself. (2. P,,
vii. 40, ix. 11).

2 The sackcloth] He means
the haircloth which the prophets,
like the later Christian ascetics,
adopted as their habitual dress.
Comp. z. Kings i. 8, Zech. xili. 4.
The phrase ‘to gird sackcloth’ im-
plies that it was worn as an outer
garment. ‘Naked’ means without
this outer garment (1 Sam. xix. 24,
Am. ii. 16, Mic. i. 8, John xxi. 7).
On the practical impressiveness of
such an act in Jerusalem, see Sir E.
Strachey’s excellent remarks, Yew-
ish History and Politics, p. 114.
Micah (i. 8) performed a similar
symbolic act. His words ‘I will go
stripped and naked ’ suggest that
the appearance of the prophet is
typical of the enforced ‘nakedness’
destined for his people.

1 Menant, Annales des vois d' Assyrie, p. 186; Schrader, K. A. T., p. 406.

124 ISAIAH. [cHAP. xx,
and take thy shoe from off thy foot: and he did so, going
naked and barefoot. *And Jehovah said, according as my
servant Isaiah hath gone naked and barefoot * three years for
a sign® and an omen against Egypt and against Ethiopia,
‘so shall the king of Assyria lead the captives of Egypt and
the exiles of Ethiopia, young men and old, naked and bare-
foot and with buttocks uncovered,a shame for Egypt. ° And
men shall be dismayed and ashamed because of Ethiopia

their expectation and Egypt their ornament.

6 And the in-

® For three years a sign, Sept., Vulg., Hebr. accents, Luzzatto, Del , Kay.

* The act is symbolic—the only
recorded instance of the sort (as
chap. vi. is the only recorded vision)
in the works of Isaiah. Two diffi-
culties have to be resolved. First,
as to the historical character of the
act related here. Some (e.g., Kue-
nen, Onderzoek, i. 76) think that it
is not historical, but an imaginative
embodiment of the idea of captivity,
and take the same view of the simi-
lar episodes in Hosea, Jeremiah,
and Ezekiel. But we ought rather
to consider each case separately ;
and there is, I think, a special in-
ippropriateness in ascribing such
a procedure to a prophet like the
‘royal’ Isaiah. The second diffi-
culty relates to the duration of the
sign. Some critics, ancient as well
as modern, have found it difficult to
believe that so strange a spectacle
should have been exhibited for
three whole years. Hence, ac-
cording to some (but see xxix. Io
Heb.), the Massoretes have put a
stop (Athnakh) after the word for
‘barefoot,’ in order to make the
second part of the verse run ‘for
three years a sign.” Vitr. (doubt-
fully), Del., Kay, and Stade adopt
this view, and Vitr. further conjec-
tures virtually that the text origin-
ally ran thus, ‘As my servant Isaiah
hath gone naked and barefoot three
days, for three years a sign,’ &c.,
which he supports by the observa-
tion that rpia érn is twice expressed
in the Sept. This latter view (ap-
proved by Lowth) is at any rate
better than the supposition that
Isaiah performed the symbolic act

only once; a single act of this
kind would have been at most a
nine days’ wonder. The difficulty is
entirely caused by a preconceived
notion as to what was proper con-
duct for Isaiah. Apart from this,
no one would have entertained a
doubt that ‘three years’ belongs
naturally to ‘hath gone’ and not to
‘a sign.’—A greater difficulty than
that of the ‘propriety’ or ‘impro-
priety’ of a three years’ ‘sign’ of
this kind arises from the Annals of
Sargon, which show that the (final)
siege of Ashdod lasted only a part
of a year (see Smith, Assyrian
Canon, p.129). The true solution,
I think, is that the three years are
to be counted from the rebellion of
Azuri (see Introd.) There were,
in fact, two sieges of Ashdod, one
issuing in the deposition of Azuri,
the other in the captivity of the
whole people of Ashdod, and these
are fused together in the compen-
dious statement of v. I——Ana
Jehovah said] i.e., at the end of
the three years.

* The meaning of the sign—the
shameful captivity of Egypt and
Ethiopia.

5,6 The application, The ful-
filment of the sign will radically
cure the men of Palestine of their
inveterate confidence in Egypt. See
Last Words, vol. ii. This re-
gion] The reference is dispute.
Chwolson, rendering ‘yonder is-
land, thinks of Cyprus (comp. Jer.
xxv, 22), which submitted to Sargon
in his eleventh campaign, see $v/cd.
Zettschr., 1872, p. 306 ; Knob., ren-

CHAP. XXL] ISAIAH.

125

habitants of this »region shall say in that day, Behold, thus
hath it gone with our expectation, whither we fled for help to
get deliverance from the king of Assyria; and how can we
escape ?

» Coast-land, Ew., Del., Weir, Naeg.

dering ‘this sea coast,’ of Phoenicia ‘the people of Philistia, Judah,

(xxiil. 2, 6) and Philistia (Zeph. ii.
5); Hitzig, of Philistia only. The
two latter have seen half the
truth, but only half, for Judah can-
not be excluded, comp. xxx. 3. It
seems to me that all the small po-
pulations of Palestine are intended,
which, in the hope of Egyptian
assistance, had revolted or were
conspiring to revolt from Assyria.

Edom, and Moab, dwelling [who
dwell] beside the sea, bringing [who
bring] tribute and presents to Assur
my lord, were speaking treason’
(Smith, Assyrian Canon, p. 130).
To those who adopt the rendering
‘this sea-coast’ the parallel ex-
pression used by Sargon will have
special force. Comp. Ewald, A7zs-
tory, i. 215.

Comp. Sargon’s statement, that

CHAPTER XXI.

VERSES 1-10. The fall of Babylon; the ‘vision’ which announced it,
and its effect upon Isaiah. We must again digress into the province of
the ‘higher criticism,’ as the exegesis depends more than usual on the
age of the prophecy. Very many moderns, and the present writer him-
self formerly, have found the date in the Babylonian exile, and not with-
out reasons of striking plausibility. In the first place, it should be
observed that the prophet writes in the style and with the fervour of a
contemporary, and that the only siege of Babylon with which students of
Isaiah have (until lately) been acquainted is that at the close of the
Exile. Next, the mention of Elam and Media agrees with the fact that
Cyrus, born king of Elam (see Essay x.), conquered the Medes before
attacking Babylonia, and the picture of the capture of Babylon during a
banquet reminds us of Belshazzar’s feast in Dan. v. (comp. Herod. i. 191
end). Nothing but a strong sense of the exegetical difficulties prevents
me from still adhering to the modern theory, together with a suspicion
that chap. xxi. I-10 hangs together with chap. xxii. (see Introd.). The
difficulties referred to are—1. the tone of strong depression in which the
prophet announces his tidings (vv. 3, 4, 10), and the absence of any-
thing even distantly resembling revenge ; 2. the form of the second part
of the prophecy, which seems to me to presuppose distance from
Babylon; and 3. the fact that both ideas and phraseology are in
harmony with the authorship of Isaiah: compare v. 1 with xxx. 6; v. 2
with xxxiii. 1; v. 5 (Hebr.) with xxii. 13 (Hebr.) ; v. 6 with viii. 11, xviii. 4,
xxi. 16, xxxi. 4; (vékeb) vv. 7, 9 with xxii. 6; v. 10 with xxviii. 28 and 22.
These latter phenomena seem considerably to weaken the strength of
the case for a date at the end of the Exile. Let it be observed further,
1. That the description of the capture of the city during a revel is picto-

126 ISAIAH. [CHAP. Xx1.

rial and imaginative, not predictive; 2. that Isaiah gives Elam an
equally prominent place in a besieging army in xxii. 6, and that even if
he does not mention Media elsewhere, yet this country was not beyond
his horizon (see on xiii. 17), and, 3. that Assyrian researches have
revealed not less than three sieges of Babylon in the lifetime of Isaiah,
viz., in 710 by Sargon, and in 703 and 691 by Sennacherib! (see G. Smith’s
Assyria, pp. 107, 110, 123). It is no longer adventurous to propose the
view that Isaiah himself may be the writer, and that he may refer to
some one of these three sieges ; but to which? The language of v. 9
rather suggests the last of the three, the issue of which is thus described
by Mr. George Smith: ‘ Babylon was now wholly given up to an in-
furiated soldiery ; its walls were thrown down, its towers demolished,
its people given up to violence and slavery, the temples rifled, and the
images of the gods brought out and broken in pieces’ (Assyria, p. 123;
comp. Sennacherib’s Bavian inscription, R. P., ix. 126). The objection
to regarding this siege (or that in 703) as the subject of the prophecy is
that the Elamites (who were now in alliance with the Babylonians) had
been in a state of revolt from Assyria from the very accession of
Sennacherib. We can hardly imagine that this was unknown to Isaiah ;
in fact, there was a presumption against any of the tributary nations
persisting in their allegiance when the murder of Sargon had given the
signal for revolt.

I conclude, then, that the siege of Babylon in 710 is not improbably
that referred to. Sargon did not indeed destroy the captured city, but
he tells us himself that he ‘ made to shake the entrails of the town of Bel
and of Merodach’ (‘Annals of Sargon,’ by Oppert, &. P., vii. 46). I am
not embarrassed by the want of a more minute fulfilment, since the
phenomena of prophecy do not justify me in requiring it. The pro-
phecy, thus understood, both illustrates and is illustrated by the nar-
rative in chap. xxxix.

The king of Babylon at the time of this siege (and also in 703) was
Merodach-Baladan, who, as we know from xxxix. 1 (=2 Kings xx, 12), sent
an embassy to Hezekiah. His immediate interests, in fact, were identical
with those of Hezekiah, with whom he probably desired to form an alliance,
and who responded to his wishes so far at least as to exhibit all his
treasures and his armour. This helps us to understand the depression
with which Isaiah announces his revelation. Although he recognised, as
a prophet, the divine necessity of Babylon’s fall, he must, at any rate,
have known, and have grieved from a human point of view to know, that
it was an event of evil omen for still weaker kingdoms. It is true,
the king of Elam was at this time favourably disposed to Merodach-
Baladan, which is at first sight inconsistent with the summons, ‘Go up,
O Elam’ (v. 2). But we may reply—r. that Isaiah need not have been
minutely acquainted with the then shifting political relations of Elam and
her neighbours ; 2. that as a matter of fact the Elamites were not all
either able or willing to support their king in the line he wished to adopt

' The circumstances of the latter of these sieges agree even better with the prophet's
description than those of the siege by Sargon (see Smith, as above).

CHAP. XxI J ISAIAH. 127
(see R. P., vii. 44, 45) ; and 3. that part of Elam appears to have been an-
nexed to Assyria by Sargon in 721 (R. P., vii. 29).

The above view is identical with that of Dr. Paul Kleinert, Theolog.
Studien und Krittken, 1877, pp. 174-79. It should be added that the late
Mr. George Smith also before him referred this prophecy to Sargon’s
conquest of Babylon (Z. S. B. A., ii. 329). The evidence in its favour is
exegetical, and will therefore not command universal assent. For my
own part, I gladly admit that a fuller knowledge of the circumstances of
the Jews might conceivably enable us to reconcile the prophecy with a
date at the close of the Exile. Let the other side as willingly acknowledge
the remarkable contrast pointed out long ago by De Wette between this
prophecy and the rest of the group which relates to Babylon.

1[Utterance of the wilderness *of the sea.*]_ As tempests

in the southland sweeping along, it cometh from the wilder-

ness, from a terrible land. ? A hard vision is announced unto

me: ‘The barbarous dealer dealeth barbarously, and the

waster wasteth. Go up, Elam! Besiege Media! All the

sighing (?) thereof will I bring to stillness. * Therefore my
® Sept. omits,

1 utterance ...] Anenigma- It cometh from the wilderness]

tical title, reminding us of the titles
of prophecies in v. II, Xxil. I, Xxx.
6. The sense is probably that
Babylonia was to become a marshy
desert (comp. xiv. 23), ‘the sea’
being a name given to the Euphra-
tes for a similar reason as to the
Nile in xviii. 2, xix. 55 comp.
Herod. i. 184, where it is said that,
before Semiramis, the river used to
make a sea of the whole plain.
The Assyrians, too, called S. Chaldea
‘the sea-land’ (Schrader, KX, A. T.,
Pp. 353). In Jer. li. 36 (comp. 1. 38)
Babylon’s ‘sea’ is again referred
to, and threatened with being dried
up.——-In the southland] 1.e., in
the south of Judah, called by the
special topographical name /Veged,
‘dry country.’ For these ‘tem-
pests,’ see Zech. ix. 14, Job xxxvii.
9, i. 19, Hos. xili. 15, Jer. iv. 11,
xiii, 24. Comp. also Layard’s
description of the violent whirl-
winds of Babylonia and Susiana :
‘They could be seen as they ad-
vanced from the desert, carrying
along with them clouds of sand
and dust. Almost utter darkness
prevailed during this passage’ (/Vz-
neveh and its Remains, chap. v.).—

Babylonia was bordered on the
S.W. by the Arabian desert. There
is no cuneiform evidence that any
invasion of Babylon was made
from the S.W.; but why should
we insist on a literal historical ful-
filment? It is a grand poetical
symbol which we have before us.
Terrible land] Comp. xxx. 6,
Deut. viii. 15. :

? Hard] 1e., calamitous, as I
Kings xiv. 6. Vision] i.e., reve-
lation.——The barbarous dealer]
i.e, the Assyrian army. The Hebr.
b6géd is strictly one who deals
faithlessly : then, one who has no
regard for the law of humanity.—
a barbarous conqueror (as xxxiv.
16, xxxiii. 1). Elam] The Elam-
ites had been made tributary by
Sargon in 721 (2. P., vii. 29, comp.
41).——Mredia] The Median con-
quests of Assyria had begun long
before Sargon (see on xiii. 17).——
Sighing] 1.e., the ‘sighing’ caused
by Babylon—if the text be correct.
But theverb ‘to still’ rather suggests
anoun, such as ‘jubilation’ (xvi,
10), or ‘arrogance’ (xiii. IT).

3:4 Such terrible tidings over-
power the prophet. He thinks

128

ISATAH.

[CHAP. XXxI.

loins are filled with anguish; pangs have taken hold of me,
like the pangs of a woman in travail: I writhe so that I can-

not hear: Iam alarmed so that I cannot see.

4 My heart

beateth ; terror hath frighted me; the evening of my plea-

sure he hath turned for me into trembling.

> Preparing the

table! "spreading the coverlet (?)! Peating, drinking! ‘ Arise,

ye princes, anoint the shield.’

6 For thus hath the Lord said unto me: ‘Go, place a

watchman ; what he shall see, he shall announce.’

7And “he

saw a troop of horsemen by pairs, a troop (of riders) on asses,
> So Hitz.—Watching the watch, Del., Naeg.—Setting (?) the watch, Kay.--

Taking a horoscope (??), Ew.

assuming him to be Isaiah) of his
own city, and of the fate which
threatens it (xxxii. 13, 14); or, ac-
cording to others, is far more sym-
pathetic towards the land of his
exile (assuming him to be living
in Babylonia) than most of the
exile-prophets. My loins] The
loins as the seat of the sharpest
pain, Nah. ii. ro (11 Heb.), Ezek.
xxi. 6 (11 Heb.), Jer. xxx. 6.
The evening of my pleasure] i.c.,
in which I take pleasure, either as
the time of repose, or (Kleinert)
of visionary communications from
on high.

5 Preparing the table... |
Historical infinitives, vividly de-
picting the arrogant security of the
Babylonians. They are dancing
and revelling at a banquet. Sud-
denly the feasting is interrupted by
the announcement that the walls
have been stormed, and that the
palace itself is in danger. It is
plausible, though (see Introd.) not
necessary, to connect this descrip-
tion with ‘ Belshazzar’s feast,’ which
appears (comp. Dan. v. 4 and note
in Essay x.) to have had primarily
a religious character, whereas this
feast is apparently nothing but a
court-revel. Spreading the co-
verlet] i.e. either the cloth on
which the viands are set, or the
coverings of the seats of the ban-
queters. This rend. suits the con-
text best, and accounts best for the
article, but is far from certain. —-
Anoint the shield] They had not

even prepared their shields for
battle—so confident were they!
The ‘anointing’ was mainly in
order that the weapons of the
enemy might glide off them.

6 9 Explanatory of vv. 2-5. Isaiah
feigns that he has been directed by
Jehovah to set a watchman, but the
watchman is really himself. The
prophet, as Ewald points out, has,
as it were, a double personality,
and discharges two separate func-
tions at the same moment. He
is at once a ‘watchman,’ intent
upon every indication of the Divine
will, and the prophet who listens
to the report (somewhat as a
man who dreams). Here Isaiah
wishes to make it clear that it was
no political calculation of his own,
but a warning from above, which
gave him the certitude of Babylon’s
fall. Hence his fiction. Hab. ii.
I is closely parallel_—It seems to
me easier to understand the pas-
sage about the ‘watchman,’ if
written at Jerusalem, than as the
work of an exile in Babylon.
unto me] Added for emphasis,
as in v. 16 (fsazah’s), vill. 11, XXxi. 4.

7 Asses .. . camels] Thecom-
mentators here quote Herod. i. 80,
iv. 129, vii. 86, to show that some
of the soldiers in the Persian army
rode on asses or camels. But asses
and camels are expressly mentioned
as left on the field of battle by Me-
rodach-Baladan (Bellino cylinder,
ap. Schrader, K. A. 7., ed. z, pp.
345, 6), and we may presume that

CHAP. XX1.] ISAIAH. 129

a troop on camels ; and he hearkened ° very diligently. *And
he cried (as) a lion, ‘O Lord, I stand upon the watchtower
continually by day, and I remain at my post all the nights.’
9And behold, there came a troop of men, of horsemen by
pairs ; and he answered and said, ‘Fallen, fallen is Babylon,
and all the images of its gods he hath broken unto the ground !’
© © my threshed and winnowed one! that which I have heard
(coming) from Jehovah Sabdoth, the God of Israel, have I
announced unto you.
¢ Should he see, &c., he shall hearken, Ew., Kay.

vv. 11, 12. A short, vague, and difficult prophecy. Is it in prophetic
imagination that Isaiah hears a call from Seir? or did the Edomites really
consult the prophet of Jehovah, as Ahaziah consulted Baalzebub, the god
of Ekron? or has a word fallen out of the text, which, together with a
slight emendation, would perhaps make the applicants Simeonitish fugi-
tives in Seir (1 Chr. iv. 42, 43), sounding Isaiah as to their restoration to
the rights of citizenship ?' The first seems to me the right view, as most
in harmony with the heading and with the position of the prophecy. It
is ‘in the spirit’ that Isaiah hears the question of the Edomites. Per-
haps they had already suffered some great reverse ; the reading of the
three Greek versions may be correct, and may be thus explained. I would
assign the prophecy to the reign of Sargon, by whom (see on xx. 5, 6)
Judah and Edom are brought under a common accusation of seditious
plotting. In Sennacherib’s time the Edomites paid tribute to Assyria.

and coming from Babylon. Then

they were sometimes employed in
all at once it dawns upon him with

the Assyrian army. He heark-

ened] viz., for a Divine revelation.
The prophet knows that the king
of Assyria has taken the field
against various rebellious peoples,
but for some time his inner ear
catches no tidings affecting the
interests of Judah. Hence, the
imaginary watchman cried (as) a
lion (v. 8), ‘with a deep groan of
impatience.’ His cry is addressed
to Jehovah (‘O Lord’); thus we
have a key to the allegoric fiction.
The prophet is the watchman, and
he is set by Jehovah (Ezek. xxxiii,
7):
® and behold ...] Just as
the watchman had uttered his com-
plaint, the answer came. He saw
a troop of men riding, in pairs,

prophetic certitude that Babylon
has fallen. Asa prophet of Jeho-
vah, he cannot but rejoice at the
signal blow thus inflicted on idola-
try, but at the same time he recog-
nises, as a citizen, the pain which
the news must give to his own
people.

10 0 my threshed...] ‘O
Israel, who hast lately suffered so
much from the cruel Assyrian in-
vaders (under Sargon, see on x. 5,
&c.), how gladly would I have
brought thee more cheering tidings,
news of the success of the rebel-
lion against Assyria, but I can but
wait upon my office. That which
I have heard ... I have announced
unto you.’ The prophet clearly

1 So Movers, Chronik, p. 136, &c. ; Dozy, De Lsraeliten te Mehta, pp. 72-3;

Griitz, Gesch. der Fuden, ii., 1, Pp. 485.
VOL, I.

K

130 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XX1.

"[Utterance of Dumah.] ¢One calleth unto me out of
Seir : ‘Watchman, what part of the night? Watchman, what
part of the night?’ '? The watchman said, ‘ Morning cometh,
and “also night® If ye would inquire, inquire; return,
come.’

vv. 13-17. This prophecy must have been written rather later than
the foregoing. War had already reached the powerful tribe of the
Dedanites, and forced their caravans to take flight. Within a year, says
the prophet, the other tribes of Arabia shall share the same fate.
Sargon relates how Samsie, queen of mat Aridi, brought him tribute

(R. P. vii., 34).

3[Utterance f‘in the evening.‘]

4 The fugitives call, Dozy, Gr. (after Aquila, Theod., Symm. ).

In the thickets must ye

See crit. note.

e The night fleeth, Kr., Gr., virtually Dozy (emendation).
f So Del., Naeg. (but supposing an allusion to the other reading or rendering),

implies that there is more trouble
in store for his country from Assy-
ria. But he suggests the only
trustworthy source of comfort—viz.
that He who doeth all this is ‘the
God of Israel.’ Threshed (or,
trodden) and winnowed one (lit.,
son of my floor)] So of the later
kingdom of Babylon when approach-
ing its end, Jer. li. 33. It must
be remembered that threshing was
performed either by oxen treading
out with the feet (so Hos. x. II), or
with iron wains (xxvill. 28, xli. 15,
Am. i. 3, Mic. iv. 12).

1 utterance of Dumah] Adumu
in the Assyr. inscriptions is the
capital of mat Aribd (Arabia), and
Yakit, the great Arabic geographer,
mentions several places called
Dima (though none in the moun-
tains of Seir). Probably, however,
none of these towns is referred to,
but Edom (Assyr. Udumu). The
title has a mystic meaning (comp.
xxi. 1), and alludes (Dumah=
‘ silence’) to the desolation in store
for Edom. In the Hebr. of Ps,
xciv. 17, cxv. 17, Dumah = Hades.

What part of the iene
The first, second, or third watch?
Will the light soon dawn ?

19 Wrorning cometh and also
night] An enigmatical reply in the
style of that ‘wisdom’ which the

neighbouring peoples, and not least
the Edomites (Obad. 8), loved.
Various interpretations have been
given. I quote two from Dr. Weir:
‘The dawn shall certainly come,
but also night ; ie., either the light
promised is not to endure always,
but to be followed by another and
perhaps another period of darkness
(contrast lx. 19, 20, and especially
Zech. xiv. 7), or that which 1s morn-
ing to some is darkness to others.’
I prefer the former. The prophet
sees a short day of prosperity fol-
lowed by a night of trouble. But
the text may be incomplete ; see
crit. note. If ye would inquire
(or, seek)... ] ‘If ye would
have fuller information, ye may
come and ask again. This is all
that has yet been revealed to me.’
Dr. Kay (following Jerome) thinks
‘seek’ means ‘seek Jehovah,’ and
‘return, come’ = ‘repent’ (comp. Jer.
iii. 22), and so partly Dr. Weir. It
may be so, but the sister prophecy
in vv, 13-17 says nothing of the
kind, and ‘Jehovah’ would hardly
have been omitted.

18 Uiterance ‘in the evening ’]
The words ‘in the evening’ have
been adopted from the sequel by
the Hebrew editor asa title (similar
cases in xxii, 1, xxx. 6). The whole
inscription is wanting in most MSS.

CHAP. XXIL] ISAIAH. 131
lodge £in the evening,’ ye caravans of Dedanites. ™To the
thirsty bring forth water, ye inhabitants of the land of Tema;
with his bread ® meet the fugitive. 1! For before the swords
have they fled, before the *whetted sword, and before the
bent bow, and before the pressure of war. 1 For thus hath the
Lord said unto me, In a year more, as the years of a hireling,
all the glory of Kedar shall be over, and the number that is

left of 'the mighty archers,! the sons of Kedar, shall become

small, for Jehovah, Israel’s God, hath spoken.

& So Sept., Targ., Pesh., Vulg., Lowth, Hitz., Naeg.—In (or, on) Arabia.

points, Ew., Del., Kay.

Vowel-

h So Sept., Targ., Pesh., Vulg., Ew., Weir.—They met, Hebr. text.
1 The Sept. of vw. 15 is lucid, but very different.

k So Luz., Gr. ; drawn (?), TEXT.

'So Vulg., Lo., Luz., Noldeke (Gétting. gel. Anzeigen, 1871, p. 896), transposing

two words.

of Sept.——Z£n the thickets] The
caravans had had to leave the
beaten track, and take refuge in a
less exposed part of the desert,
where shrubs and thorn-bushes se-
cured them to some extent from
observation (see Del.’s note).——
In the evening] There are two
objections to the reading of the
vowel-points—one bad and one
good. The bad one is that the
name Arabia had not arisen as
early as Isaiah (Ewald), whereas it
occurs under the form Aribu (=N.
Arabia, or a part of it) in inscrip-
tions of Shalmaneser and Sargon ;
the good one is that the limitation
‘in Arabia’ would be rather super-
fluously addressed to the Dedanites.
The same confusion between ‘evebh
and ‘avdbh appears in 2 Chr. ix. 14,

comp. 1 Kings x. 15, and in the
Sept. of Hab. i. 8. Dedanites |
Mentioned by Jeremiah as belong-
ing to Edom (xlix. 8 ; comp. Ezek.
xxv. 13), and again in company
with Tema (xxv. 23). A commercial
people, Ezek. xxvii. 15, 20.

4 VYema] See Job vi. 19, Jer.
xxv. 23. On the E. border of the
Haurdn ranges, a station (now
Taim4) on the route between Pal-
myra and Petra (Wetzstein).

18 As the years ...] So xvi
14. Kedar] Here used (and per-
haps in Ps. cxx. 5, Cant. i. 5) as a
general name for the nomad tribes
of N. Arabia, so as to include
Dedan. The Kidrai are recognised
as Arabian by Assurbanipal (Smith,
Assurb., p. 271; R. P.,i.96). Comp.
Sprenger, Journ, As. Soc. 1872, p. 8

CHAPTER XXII.

VERSES 1-14. A prophecy of judgment upon Jerusalem. It is not easy
to seize the right point of view for explaining it. After much fluctuation,
these are the results to which the study of the prophecy as a whole has
led me. In the two opening verses the prophet assumes the attitude of
a stranger, and inquires the cause of the crowd on the roofs and the
boisterous merriment. How strangely ill-timed! For a part of the
population has perished by pestilence, while the warriors have either fled
or been taken prisoners. It is a calamity little short of the destruction of
the nation, and the prophet gives himself up to sorrow (vw 4). True,
K2

132 ISAIAH. (CHAP. XxII.

Jerusalem is still uncaptured, but the seer on his watch-tower foretells
that it will not long continue so. A picture unrolls itself before him of
tumult and consternation at the troops of fierce soldiery pouring in. v.6
begins a new section.!. The prophet transports himself mentally to the
first appearance of the Assyrian army, and recalls the measures of defence
hastily taken by the citizens. In v. 12 he describes a state of things which
began in the past (‘in that day’), but reaches into the present. Though
misfortune has thus been closing in upon them, the people of Jerusalem
have shut their ears to the preaching of repentance. With despair in
their hearts, they endeavour to drown thought in sensual pleasure. But
from heaven it has been distinctly revealed to the prophet that such an
offence is unpardonable, and must be punished by death.

vv. 12, 13 are the key to vv. 1,2. It is the merriment of despair of
which the prophet is the spectator. The enemy is before the walls, but
there is no thought of turning to Jehovah, who may still deliver. Hence
the prophet threatens the city with capture, and the impenitent among
its people with death.

It has always been difficult to explain the severe tone of this prophecy,
into which not a gleam of hope penetrates. If it belongs, as has been
generally supposed, to the invasion of Sennacherib, it is no easy matter to
account for it, as the tone of Isaiah at that great crisis was one of conso-
lation and promise. The most recent critic confesses, ‘I am aware of no
solution for this fundamental contradiction.’* But now that we know of
an earlier invasion—that of Sargon—we are relieved from this difficulty
The circumstances of the prophet were very probably different in the
two invasions. In the latter one there was probably a union of feeling
and purpose between the king and the prophet ; the preaching, too, of the
latter had probably produced some effect on the better minds. It seems
to have been otherwise in the time of Sargon ; and finding the prophecy
of Ariel ineffectual as a means of moral quickening, Isaiah may have de-
liberately chosen (for the ‘spirit of prophecy’ does not exclude delibera-
tion) this harder and sharper tone under the double pressure of calamity
and opposition. The view here taken is not inconsistent with the reference
to Elam in v. 6. It is true that Elam was not thoroughly conquered by
Sargon, but neither was it subjugated by Sennacherib. The Elamites
were continually stirring up trouble in the Assyrian empire in the days of
both these kings (comp. on xxi. I-10). But the Annals of Sargon appear
to show that a district or province of Elam was annexed by Sargon as early
as 721 (R. P., vii. 29), and this is perhaps referred to here under the name
of Elam. The combination with Kir shows that Isaiah must intend an
integral portion of the Assyrian empire (see on v. 6).

Prof. Friedr. Delitzsch, in his work on the site of Paradise (p. 237 of
the German edition), offers the incidental remark, ‘ that Elam never served
in an Assyrian host, any more than the nomad peoples Shoa and Koa ;
throughout the cuneiform literature it appears only as an ally of the

1 I cannot help conjecturing that something has dropped out, or been omitted, be-

tween vv, 5, 6, if not also between wv. 7, 8.
2 Cornill, ‘Die Composition des Buches Jesaja,’ in Stade’s Zeitschrift, 1884,

P- 97+

CHAP. XXII.] ISATAH. 133

Babylonians.’ If this is true, not only of Elam as a whole, but of all
Elamitish territories, and if Isaiah was bound to know that an Elamitish
contingent in an Assyrian army was inconceivable, we are driven to the
conclusion that chap. xxii. was manipulated by some subsequent writer,
who was but ill acquainted with the facts of the earlier history. The
theory can neither be proved nor disproved. At present the Isaianic
authorship of the prophecy as a whole (admitting, however, the possibility
of /acun@) seems to me tenable ; the Elamites and Shoites may have been
regarded by Isaiah as compulsory allies of their formidable Assyrian
neighbours. But even if the description of the army were cast out, the
bulk of the prophecy must be Isaiah’s, and will still be comprehensible,
and “his is the main point. (And if this be Isaiah’s, why not also xxi.
1-10, which has several features in common with chap. xxii. ?)

1[Utterance of the valley of vision.] What aileth thee,
then, that all belonging to thee have gone up to the
house-tops, ?thou that art full of uproar, a noisy city, a
joyous town? Thy slain are not slain with the sword,
nor dead in battle. * All thy chief men have fled * together,
without * bow they have been made prisoners; all of them
that were seized have together been made prisoners—they
fled far away. ‘Therefore I say, Look away from me,
let me weep bitterly; be not urgent to comfort me for
the destruction of the daughter of my people. *°For a day
of discomfiture and of treading down and of perplexity

® Together from the, Ew., putting (;) at ‘ bow.’

All belonging to thee] The
whole population of Jerusalem is
criminated in this chapter (see In-
trod.).—_—Gone up to the house-
tops] The meaning of this and the
first part of the next verse seems to
me clear from v. 13. It was the
forced gaiety of despair which drove
the people to the banquet-table,
and (we may conclude) to the (flat)
house-tops also. The latter appear
elsewhere as places of concourse
at festivals (Judg. xvi. 27, Neh. viii.
16), ——Not slain with the sword]
There had as yet, therefore, been no
actual fighting, but the crowding of
refugees from the country-districts
had produced famine (comp. Lam.
iv. 9) or pestilence (comp. v. 25,
Weir), or both.

3 an thy chief men... | Thy
rulers (same word in i. 10) have fled
in despair from the devoted city

(comp. 2 Kings xxv. 4, Jer. iv. 29),
but, meeting the Assyrians, have
thrown their bows away and sur-
rendered. Comp. the terror of the
‘house of David’ on a less great
occasion (vii. 2).——They fied] i.e.,
while they were fleeing.

4 The last stage of calamity can
be already foreseen ; the prophet de-
scribes it as ‘the destruction’ of his
people (same word in xiii. 6, Kay).

5 a day] viz., of judgment (ii. 12).
This ‘day’ is then described in a
series of inimitable assonances. We
seem to see and hear the last hurry-
ing stages of the siege and capture.
—tThe valley (or ravine) of vi-
sion] Probably one of the valleys
about Jerusalem, where, as v. 7
states, the horsemen had taken up
a position towards the gate. The
meaning of the phrase must remain
uncertain. On the analogy of Joel

34

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XXII.

hath the Lord Jehovah Sabdoth, in the valley of vision;

>Kir undermineth, and Shoa is at the mount.?

6 And

> So Luzzatto, Ew. (second ed.)—There is undermining of the wall, and a crying
soundeth unto the mountains.—Ew. (first ed.), Del., and most.

v. (iii.) 141 it may be conjectured
that ‘valley of vzszon’ should have
some reference to the struggle going
on at the place so described. [‘ Mul-
titudes, multitudes in the valley
(‘Emek) of decision ( = Jehoshaphat) ;
for the day of Jehovah is near in
the valley of decision.’] ‘Vision’
may mean ‘a vision of Jehovah
directing the struggle’; comp. the
derivation of Moriah in 2 Chron. iii.
1 (‘appearance of Jehovah’). This
seems at any rate more natural than
Ewald’s and Knobel’s theory that
the phrase designates the quarter
where Isaiah lived and received his
visions. Others (Ges., Del., comp.
Vitr.) have supposed it to be a
synonym for Jerusalem, the home
of prophecy (comp. Luke xiii. 33).
Why, it is asked, should the ‘ day
of discomfiture’ be confined to one
alone of the valleys of Jerusalem ?
The only reply is, that it is not
really so confined; but the prophet
is specially attracted by a spot
where the fight was thickest (see
above) ; and on the other hand, we
may ask, What propriety is there
in calling Jerusalem a ‘valley’?
It is surely the all but universal
practice of the Hebrew writers to
describe Jerusalem as a mountain
(‘mount Zion’), and we may add, to
picture the prophets as standing on
watch-towers, and not in the valleys.
True, the personified people of Je-
rusalem is addressed in Jer. xxi. 13
as ‘inhabitress of the valley’ (‘é7ek),
but this is immediately supple-
mented by the words ‘(even) of the
rock of the level country.’ Kir
undermineth ...]| There were
iron tools specially designed for
the work of undermining (comp.
Josephus, de Bell. Fud., v. 4.2). Kir
and Shoa are the names of parts
of the Assyrian empire (on Kir, see

below). The latter is mentioned in
Ezek. xxiii. 23 in company with Pe-
kod (Puqudu, an Aramzan tribe
bordering on Elam in the Assyrian
inscriptions) and Koa. It has been
identified by Prof. Friedr. Delitszch?
with the Sutd or Su, a tribe dwel-
ling between the Tigris and the
southern slopes of the mountains of
Elam (similarly Koa=the Qutié or
Qu). The objection I formerly took
to the above rendering was that the
harmony of the picture was de-
stroyed by so abrupt a commence-
ment of the catalogue of names of
peoples. This, however, is not so
serious a one as it might be, if the
context were certainly preserved in
its integrity. But, as I remarked
before, this is not the case; how
then can we be sure that the two
halves of v. § originally stood to-
gether? (See further in crit. note).
‘The mountains’ in alt. rend., on
the analogy of ‘mount Ephraim’
for the hill-country of Ephraim,
taking /ar collectively.

® It would be a plausible conjec-
ture that a passage has been omitted
before v. 6, in which other contin-
gents of the Assyrian army were
mentioned ; see, however, xxi. 2,
(if Isaiah’s). Elam] See Introd.
and note on xi. II. sir] The
region to which Tiglath-Pileser
transported the Damascenes (2
Kings xvi. 9), and from which, ac-
cording to Am. ix. 7, the Arameans
came. This has been generally
identified with the district by the
river Cyrus (the modern Georgia).
But, besides the linguistic objection
pointed out by Del. (Kir cannot =
Kur), it appears that the Assyrian
empire never extended to the Cy-
rus. We must therefore seek for
Kir among the Assyrian conquests
mentioned in the Inscriptions ; it

1 Long after writing the above, I see that Naeg, has compared the same passage,

bnt with a very different result.

9 Wo lag das Paradies ? (\.eipzig, 1881), pp. 235-6.

CHAP. XXil.]

ISAIAH.

135

Elam carried the quiver with troops of men, of horsemen,

and Kir made bare the shield ;

7 and when thy choice valleys

were full of troops, and the horsemen had set themselves in
line towards the gate, *then did he draw aside the covering
of Judah, and thou didst look in that day to the armour of
the forest-house, °and ye saw that the breaches of David’s
city were many, and ye collected the water of the lower
pool, !°and the houses of Jerusalem ye counted and ye broke

may possibly be a shortened form
of Kirkhi or Kirruri, the former of
which lay to the east of the sources
of the Tigris, near Diarbekr, the lat-
ter near the lake of Urmia. Both
countries were conquered by Assur-
nazirpal (885-860). The suggestion
is Mr. Heilprin’s, Azstorical Poetry
of the Hebrews, ii. 180,—Made
bare the shield] i.e., took away
its leathern covering, comp. Ces.,
de Bell. Gall., ii. 21 (Hitz.) See on
XXXVil. 33.

7 Phy choice valleys] Jerusa-
lem was almost surrounded by val-
leys, e.g., Kidron, Gihon, Rephaim,
Hinnom. Comp Josephus, de Bell.
Jud, V. 4. 1. Had set them-
selves in line] i.e., ready to enter
as soon as ‘the gate’ was broken
through by the rams, comp. Ezek.
xxi. 22 (27). It is the ‘ great gate’
referred to by Sennacherib (Tay-
lor’s cylinder), who boasts of having
‘caused them to break through’ it.
The remains are still to be seen,
says Lieut. Conder.

8 Then did he draw aside... ]
The subject is Jehovah (comp. v. 5).
‘ Drawing aside the curtain’ means
either exposing the utter weakness
of the state to the enemy (Ew.,
Meier), or, opening the eyes of the
Judeans to their danger (comp.
xxix. 10, 18 Hitz., Knob., Del.). The
former view seems the more suit-
able-——Here begins the account
of the measures of defence taken
by the citizens. Very similar is the
Chronicler’s account of Hezekiah’s
preparations for the siege of Sen-
nacherib, 2 Chr. xxxli. 2-5, 30 (see
Q. P.B.), and as the memory of
Sargon’s siege had faded away by

the time of the Chronicler, it is
possible that there is a confusion
between the precaut ons taken on
these two occasions. The com-
piler of Kings alludes briefly to
some of the same measures as the
Chronicler, but does not assign a
date (2 Kings xx. 20). It was of
course a matter of primary im-
portance to prevent the enemy from
using the water of the fountains
(see on vii. 3). Sargon gives a simi-
ar account of the preparations for
the siege of Ashdod (Smith, Assy-
rian Discoveries, p. 291 top), ‘And
they brought the waters of the
springs in front of the city.’ The
first step of the citizens, however,
is to look after the supply of arms.
‘The forest-house |—‘the house
of the forest of Lebanon’ (1 Kings
vii. 2, x. 17, Jer. xxii. 23), a part of
Solomon’s palace, which was used
as an arsenal (xxxix. 2.)

° And ye saw... .] ‘ Ye,’i.e., the
princes, who practically monopo-
lised the government(comp. on vii. 2,
xxxii. I)———The city of David] i.e.
the fortress Zion, 2 Sam. v. 7, 9. ——
The lower pool] Certainly not the
medizeval tank called Birket-es-
Sultan, but possibly the pool made
by Hezekiah, according to 2 Kings
XX. 20.

10 The houses. . . ye counted]
Partly to see how many could be
spared, partly for the inhabitants
to identify their property. —To
fortify the wall] To withstand the
shocks of the battering-rams. So
2 Chr. xxxii. 5, ‘and he built up
all the wall that was broken, and
raised thereupon towers,’ and Jer.
xxxiil. 4 ‘the houses. . . which are

136 ISAIAH. (CHAP. XxII.
down the houses to fortify the wall, "and ye made a lake
between the two walls for the water of the old pool; but ye
looked not unto him who made it, and him who formed
it from afar ye did not regard. And the Lord, Jehovah
Sabdoth, called in that day to weeping, and to lamentation,
and to baldness, and to girding with sackcloth ; " but behold,
joy and gladness, killing oxen and slaughtering sheep, eating
flesh and drinking wine, ‘Eat and drink, for to-morrow we

shall die.’

4 But (this) hath been made known °in the ears

© So Sept., Cornill ; most render the text, ‘But Jehovah Sabdoth hath revealed

himself in mine ears, [saying. ]

thrown down because of (i.e., to re-
sist) the mounds and because of the
engines of war.’ }

| A lake] i.e., a large pool, or
reservoir. Between the two
walls] i.e., between that of Ophel
on the east, and that of the High
Tower on the west, where the Ty-
ropzon valley is particularly narrow.
—-The old pool] i.e. probably the
‘Pool of Siloam’ (called ‘ The Pool’
par excellence in the Hebrew in-
scription in the rock-tunnel leading
to Siloam).——But ye looked not]
A contrast to ‘thou didst look’ (v.
8). ‘Who made it . . . formed
it] i.e., in the counsels of eternity,
as appears from xxxvii. 26 (same
words). Comp. on v. 12.

2 and the Lord ... called]
i.e., the prophet, God’s messenger,
or perhaps the silent march of
events, called upon you to repent ;
penitence might have turned the
Divine purpose, Joel ii. 14. To
heen So Am. viii. 10, ‘I will
bring. . . baldness upon every head.’
The prophets accept things as they
are, and do not trouble themselves
with premature innovations. ‘ Bald-
ness,’ however, is forbidden in Lev.
xxi. 5, Deut. xiv. 1.

13 But no moral effect has been
produced by calamity. They rush
to the banquet-table with despair
in their hearts, and waste the pro-

visions which ought to be husband-
ed for the siege. ——¥ or to-mor-
row we shall die] It is doubted
whether these words are quoted in _
mockery from the prophet (Ges.),
or whether they express the sen-
sualism of despair (Hitz.). The
latter view is simpler and more
natural.

4 But it is made known... ]
The Rabbis understand ‘ this thing’
for a subject, and ‘saith’ before
‘Jehovah Sabdoth’ (comp. v. 9),
or else explain as if they read ‘I
am Jehovah Sabdoth.” The ordi-
nary explanationis still more forced.
A single vowel-point is wrong; the
Massoretes shrank from the anthro-
pomorphism ‘the ears of Jehovah.’
—Shall not be cancelled. . . ]
Death shall indeed overtake you by
the hand of the enemy (as A.E.
rightly explains), as the punishment
of your guilt. ‘Some of the Jewish
writers understand the words to
mean “at death, but not before,” and
draw the inference that death does
or may atone for sin’ (Alexander).
But it is not a Biblical idea that a
sinner who has borne his punish-
ment is thereby released from guilt.
Punishment has only the effect of
expiation when borne by the inno-
cent on behalf of the guilty. See
Riehm, Der Begriff der Stihne
us.w., Theol. Studien u. Kritiken,

1 Khérebh is probably from a root meaning to pierce (comp. £46”, a hole), and can
therefore just as well be applied to a battering-ram (or to some similar engine) as to
asword. Here, as in Jer, v. 17, Ezek. xxvi. 9, the rendering ‘engines of war’ seems
to be required. For pictures of battering-rams, see Bonomi’s Mineveh and its Palaces,
p. 163; notice their lance-headed extremities.

CHAP. XXII] ISAIAH. 137

of Jehovah*® Sabdoth ; surely this iniquity shall not be can-
celled unto you till ye die, saith the Lord, Jehovah Sabdoth.

vv. 15-25. Denunciation of Shebna and promises to Eliakim. Pro-
bably this prophecy was written a short time before the invasion of
Sennacherib, for in the narrative of this event Shebna is represented as
holding a lower office (see on vv. 20-24). Isaiah’s only invective against
an individual.

5 Thus saith the Lord, Jehovah Sabdoth, Go, get thee unto
this high officer, even unto Shebna, who is over the house.
'6 What (right) hast thou here, and whom hast thou here, that
thou hewest thee out here a sepulchre ? hewing him out his
sepulchre on high, carving him out in the rock a habitation !
7 Behold, Jehovah will 4hurl, will hurl thee, O man,? and
clutch thee tightly ; }®he will roll thee up (and toss thee) as
a ball into a broad country ; thither shalt thou go to die, and

4 Cast thee with a man's (i.e., a manly) cast, Del. (but see crit. note. ).

1877, Heft 1. Isaiah’s threat is the Pharaohs and Caliphs of

therefore precisely parallel to I
Sam. iii. 14.

18 Phis high officer] (On ren-
dering, see crit. notes.) ‘ This,’
with a touch of disparagement (as
vi. 9). Shebna’s present function was
that of ‘house-steward’ (mentioned
1 Kings iv. 6). Its importance is
shown by the fact that it was once
held by a ‘king’s son,’ 2 Chr. xxvi.
21, and by the order of the court-
officers in xxxvi. 3, xxxvii.2. It has
been well compared to the Frank-
ish officer of Mayor of the Palace.
—-Shebna] From his father’s
name not being mentioned, it is
probable that Shebna was not a
native Israelite ; his name (which
is in the Aramaic ‘ emphatic state’)
points to a Syrian origin. If he
was a refugee from Damascus, he
would naturally be an advocate of
an Egyptianizing policy, and would
thus be one of the ‘crooked’ poli-
ticians, whom the prophet inveighs
against in xxx. 12. The brother
of the famous Rabbi Hillel was also
called Shebna.

16 Shebna, like eastern grandees
generally (comp. Joseph of Arima-
thea, Eshmunazar king of Sidon,

Egypt, &c.), builds himself a se-
pulchre in his lifetime. Comp.
xiv. 18, ‘¢hy grave”——What
(right) hast thou here?] Shebna’s
offence is aggravated by his being
a foreigner. Even at a much later
time a ‘potters field’ was good
enough ‘to bury strangers in’
(Matt. xxvii. 7) ‘Here, ie, in
Jerusalem ; note the indignant re-
petition. On high] Not neces-
sarily on mount Zion (Knob.), or
on its eastern slope (Del.). Tombs
have been found on the slopes of
all the hills about Jerusalem.—— a
habitation] Heb. mshkan, else-
where used only of God, and imply-
ing a great personage and a long
sojourn (comp. Eccles. xii. 5, Ps.
xlix. 12, Sept., Targ.).——O man]
I formerly rendered ‘O mighty
man !’ supposing a touch of irony
in the phrase. This is certainly
suggested by the etymology, but is
not favoured by the use of the word
elsewhere, especially in Job, where
it several times occurs (but without
irony), in strong contrast with God
(see Job iv. 17, x. 5, xxil. 2)——A
broad country] i.e., the plains of
Mesopotamia.

138 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXII

thither shall go thy glorious chariots, thou disgrace of the
house of thy lord! '° And I will thrust thee from thy post,
and from thy station shall he pull thee down. * And it shall
come to pass in that day that I will call my servant Eliakim,
son of Hilkiah, #4and I will clothe him with thy robe, and
with thy girdle will I bind him, and thy authority will I give
into his hand, and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of
Jerusalem and to the house of Judah ; and I will lay the key
of the house of David upon his back, so that he shall open
and none shall shut, and he shall shut and none shall open.
3 And I will strike him as a peg into a sure place, and he
shall be for a seat of honour to his father’s house ; * and they
shall hang upon him all the honour of his father’s house, the
scions and the offshoots, all the vessels of small size, from the

1 Note the change of person ;
Jehovah is the subject, however, in
both clauses.

20-24 Nomination of Eliakim. We
have only evidence of a partial
fulfilment of Isaiah’s authoritative
word. Eliakim was house-steward,
and Shebna merely secretary, when
the Rab-shakeh came to Jerusalem
(xxxvi. 3). Perhaps this was all
that Hezekiah was able to effect
against the opposition of the
‘princes.’ Isaiah evidently pre-
dicts a complete change of system,
which would consist in the total
abstinence from a policy of ex-
pediency and worldly alliances.
Hence the strong language, almost
Messianic in its tone, with which
Isaiah hails in spirit the elevation
of his disciple Eliakim.

21 Robe... girdle] The offi-
cial dress of a high officer of state.
The ‘robe’ is the long, sleeved
tunic worn by people of rank, e.g.,
Joseph and Tamar (Vitr.). The
girdle (abjuetz) is a costly one, such
as priests wore (see Jos. Azzy. ili. 7.
2). Into his hand] Comp. Jer.
xxxiv. 1 (Hebr.). A father] The
term is used of a prime minister in
Gen. xlv. 8, 1 Macc. xi. 32; of the
chief men of a town (1 Chr. ii. 24,
iv. 5, &c., Ew.). Comp. ix. 6, Job
xxix, 16, Judg. v. 7.

2% X will lay the key.... ]

The ‘key’ here symbolizes the au-
thority of the ‘ Deputy’ or royal
representative. (See on ix. 6, and
comp. Matt. xvi. 19, Rev. iii. 7.)
An Eastern key is as much as a
man can carry (see figures in
Bonomi’s Mineveh and its Palaces,
p- 150).

8-24 Description of Eliakim’s
tenure of office, As a peg into
a sure place] i.e., into a good
solid wall—not mere plaster, as
in an ordinary house—so as to be
able to support a large number of
vessels. (Comp. Zech. x. 4, where
‘peg’ = prince.)

28 All the honour of his father’s
house] This is a strange expres-
sion, as it has to cover the undis-
tinguished members of Eliakim’s
family as well as the distinguished.
‘Honour’ must be almest equiva-
lent to ‘multitude’ (so Hitz., Del.),
and no doubt the importance of a
family (‘father’s house’ = family)
depended chiefly on its numbers.
The entire passage, too, is strange,
seeming, as it does, to give the
Divine sanction to family-partiality.
I say ‘seeming,’ because I suspect
that the fall with which Eliakim in
his turn is threatened is the punish-
ment of an evil tendency which
Isaiah noticed in Eliakim.——off-
shoots] A contemptuous expres-
sion (cognate word Ezek. iv 15).

CHAP. XXIIL] ISAIAH. 139
bowl-shaped vessels to all pitcher-like vessels. ™In that day
—an oracle of Jehovah Sabdaoth—the peg that is struck into
a sure place shall give way ; it shall be cut down and shall fall

and the burden upon it shall perish, for Jehovah hath spoken.

25 The peg] It is doubted whether
this refers to Shebna or Eliakim ;
but surely ‘ ¢he Zeg’ must be iden-
tical with that mentioned in the
preceding verses. There is nothing
strange in the anticipation that a
high Zas¢ern official should not
be in favour for ever, and that his
fall should involve the ruin of his
adherents. The difficulty lies in
the words ‘in that day, which

seem to co-ordinate, by way of
contrast, the event here spoken of
with that in v. 19. But we need
not interpret the phrase so strictly.
It may, in v. 25, merely imply that
at the very time when Eliakim’s
connections are basking in the
sunshine of prosperity, a sudden
change shall come. Thus Jehovah
will ‘ profane the pride of all glory’
(xxiii. 9).

CHAPTER XXIII.

AN elegy, in three stanzas or strophes (vv. 1-5, 6-9, 10-14), on the fall of
Tyre, followed by a kind of appendix on the future revival of the merchant-
city. For an analysis, see ZC. A., p. 55.

There have been great differences of opinion as to the date of this
prophecy, several eminent critics supposing that the siege referred to is
that of Nebuchadnezzar (comp. Ezek. xxvi. 4-21). The main argument
in favour of this view is derived from v. 13. Taking this verse together
with the next, it was not unnatural to suppose that the Chaldeans were
thus prominently mentioned as the future destroyers of Tyre. But there
is another view of the verse, and one, moreover, which is exegetically
easier, viz. that the fate of the Chaldeans is pointed to as a warning for
Tyre :—Babylonia had fallen a prey to Assyria, how should Tyre escape ?
This view, natural as it is, could not, however, have been entertained
until it was possible to show that Babylonia had really been thus severely
chastised by her powerful neighbour. Now that this has been done—now
that we know that Babylonia was conquered three times over in the reigns
of Sargon and Sennacherib (see Introd. to xxi. 1-10), there seems nothing
to prevent us from adopting it.1 The selfishness and injustice on which
the Tyrian empire was based were to the prophet a sure guarantee of its
overthrow, and a special revelation appears to have warned him to expect
the event about this time.

But which of the three Assyrian invasions of Babylonia is in-
tended in v.13? There can hardly be a doubt; the description well
applies to the third, and to this alone. ‘ His (Merodach-Baladan’s) cities
I laid waste,’ says Sennacherib, ‘and burned with fire. True, there is
no capture of Tyre mentioned as following upon this devastation ; it was
in the preceding year’s expedition that Luli (the Elulceus of Menander,

1 Dr. Tiele was the first to see the bearing of Assyrian discovery on this chapter
Comp his Vergeld kende geschiedenis, p. 707.

ISAIAH, (CHAP. XXIII.

140
Jos., Anfig., ix. 14, 2) king of Zidon, and suzerain (as appears from Menan-
der) of Phcenicia, fled at the approach of Sennacherib to the island of
Cyprus (2. P., vii. 61). But it is no part of an interpreter’s duty to prove
the complete, literal fulfilment of a prophecy ;? all that he has to do, in
order to promote the enjoyment of the reader, is to collect and illustrate
the data of the prophecy. It is certain that, from a moral point of view
Pheenicia deserved chastisement, certain that the fate of Babylonia was
an evil omen to other vassal states.

The minor key in which the prophecy is pitched reminds us of xxi.
1-10. Tyre, Babylon, and Judah were fellow-sufferers from Assyria.
‘ The poetical art of the piece is in a very high degree finished,’ remarks
Ewald, who, however, finds the ‘elevation, magnificence, and energetic
brevity’ of Isaiah wholly wanting, and suspects (as in the case of chap.
xxxiii.) that a younger contemporary and disciple of the prophet is the
author. This is possible, as many phenomena converge to show that
Isaiah’s works were not always edited by himself; but I am particularly
loth to deny so artistic a work to this great and, as Ewald admits, many-
sided prophet.

1 [Utterance of Tyre.] Howl, ye ships of Tarshish, for it
is laid waste, so that there is no house, no entering in! From
the land of Chittim it has been disclosed unto them. ?Be
dumb, ye inhabitants of the coast, which Zidon’s merchants
who pass over the sea replenished. * And on great waters
was the seed of Shihor; the harvest of the River was its

ingathering, and it became *the gain® of the nations.

4Be

® The mart, Ges., Ew.

1 Wo house... ] The fleets are
homeward-bound from the western
colonies. At the very last place
of call—Cyprus, they hear the sad
tidings that their harbour and their
homes are desolate.

2 The coast] i.e., the Phoenician
coast (so v.6). True, this involves
a tautology with the next line, since
Zidon also=Pheenicia (as 1 Kings
xi. 1, Gen. x. 15).

3 On great waters] i.e., on the
ocean-highway (comp. Ps. cvii. 23,
Ezek. xxvii. 26).——Shihor] i.e.,
the Nile, as Jer. ii. 18. Perhaps
‘the dark grey’ (see on xiv. 12),
from the colour of the water ; if so,
a Semitic name for the Nile, but
Friedr. Del. questions this (Para-
dies, p. 311).—On the connection

of Phcenicia and Egypt, see Ezek.
xxvil. 7, Movers, Die Phénizter,
li. 3, pp. 314-336, Ebers, Egypten
und die Biicher Mosts, i. 147, &c.
The Egyptians had no timber to
build seaworthy ships ; hence their
foreign trade was carried on for
them by the Phoenicians.——The
gain] Not ‘mart, for the Phceni-
cians themselves distributed their
wares, and these in their turn
became a source of gain to other
nations (Del. after Luzzatto).

4 Be ashamed, O Zidon] i.e., O
Pheenicia! Tyrian coins bear the
legend ‘Of Tyre, mother (=chief
city) of the Zidonians.——The
stronghold of the sea] i.e., the
insulated ledge of rocks on which
new Tyre was built, Ezek. xxvi. 5,

1 As has been already pointed out, the oracle upon Tyre was not completely ful-

filled till the time of Alexander the Great.

period.

Zech. ix, 4 may perhaps refer to this

CHAP. XXI1?.] ISAIAH.

14!
ashamed, O Zidon, for the sea, the stronghold of the sea,
speaketh, saying, I have not been in travail, nor brought forth,
nor reared young men, nor brought up virgins. ®When the
tidings come to Egypt they shall be sore pained at the tidings
of Tyre Pass ye over to Tarshish ; howl, ye inhabitants of
the coast! 7°Is this, to your sorrow, the joyous one,” whose
origin is of ancient days, whose feet ° were wont to carry ° her
afar off to sojourn? ® Who hath devised this against Tyre,
the giver of crowns, whose merchants were princes, whose
traders were the honourable of the earth? % Jehovah Sabdoth
hath devised it, to desecrate the pride of all glory, to disgrace
all the honourable of the earth—'° Overflow thy land as the

> Fareth it thus with you, O joyous one! Del,
© Carry, Ges., Ew.

14. In the following words, Tyre
is aptly described as daughter of
the sea, but (a figure to express the
completeness of the ruin) denied
by her own mother.

5 They shall be sore pained]
Tyre being, as it were, an outpost
of Egypt against the Assyrians.

6 fo Tarshish] The prophet
counsels the Phcenicians to emi-
grate to their Spanish colonies, as
their fate has been determined by
the fall of the capital. So at the
siege of Tyre by Alexander, the
Tyrians sent their old men, women,
and children to Carthage(Diod. xvii.
41, Knob.), which Sept. even makes
them do here (eis Kapxndéva). Comp.
Layard’s plate, 71, ‘Enemies of the
Assyrians taking refuge in ships.’

7 A question of perplexity and
surprise (comp. xiv. 16). Is this
heap of ruins all that remains of
the joyous, the ancient, the rest-
lessly energetic Tyre? (see crit. note).
—Joyous| as Zeph. ii. 15 ——
Of ancient days] see Herod. ii.
44, Josephus, 4zt. viii. 3, 1.—
‘Whose feet were wont... ] Allud-
ing to the distant commercial jour-
neys of the Tyrians. Alt. rend.
may be explained in two ways,—
of captivity (Ges.), or of flight
(Ew). Either way is plausible. The
first is supported by the strik-
ing verbal parallel in_2 Kings
xxi. 8 (overlooked by Ges.); the

second gives a special force to
the words ‘to sojourn,’ which will
mean that the Phcenician fugitives
are to be only tolerated péroixor (=
gérim) in their own colonies. But
I think the context decides that the
clause must contain, a feature, not
of the present Tyre, but of the past.
In this case, too, ‘to sojourn’ is a
perfectly accurate phrase.

8 The giver of crowns], viz., to
the kings of the Phoenician colonies,
perhaps also of the other Phoeni-
cian cities. Modern parallels will
occur to everyone.

® To desecrate] So Ezek. xxviii.
7. Beauty having a kind of natural
sanctity (comp. Lev. xix. 29, Heb.).
There is no occasion to imagine a
special reference to the temples of
Tyre (as Del.).

10 The fall of Tyre is the signal
for the emancipation of her colonies.
About this time we hear of a revolt
of Cyprus, andthe Phcenician cities
assisting Shalmaneser (or Sargon)
in the siege of Tyre—Josephus,
Ant. ix. 14, 2. Tarshish, or Tartes-
sus, with its silver mines, may well
have been, as Strachey remarks,
the hardest treated of all the colo-
nies.——As the Nile] ‘ The river
that least regards any bounds.’
There is no girdle] The expres-
sion is strange. It looks at first as
if it referred to Tarshish (comp. iii.
24), but this does not suit the con-

ISATAH. [CHAP. XXL

112
Nile ; O daughter of Tarshish, there is no girdle any more,
His hand he stretched out over the sea, he made kingdoms
to tremble ; Jehovah Sabdoth gave charge concerning Canaan,
to destroy the fortresses thereof. |! He said, thou shalt not
continue to exult, thou ravished virgin-daughter of Zidon;
arise, pass over to Chittim; even there thou shalt have no
rest. | Behold the land of 4 Chaldea ; this people is no more ;
Assyria hath appointed it for desert-beasts; they set up
their towers, they laid low their palaces; he hath made
ita ruin. ' Howl, ye ships of Tarshish, for your fortress is
laid waste !—" And it shall come to pass in that day that

4 Canaanites, Ew. (conj.).

text. Naeg. supposes an allusion In the first half of the verse he

to some dues or toll demanded on
passing a barrier.

11 Hingdoms] i.e., especially
those of Phoenicia and Syria,—
hence ‘over the sea.’ Gave
charge] So of Jehovah’s instru-
ments, xiii. 2,——Canaan] i.e.,
Pheenicia, comp. Josh. v. 1, Sept.
The word means ‘ depression,’ and
was therefore applied to various
lowland-districts of Syria.

1% The fate of Tyre shall be
shared by all Phcenicia, here called
the daughter of Zidon—hence
the plural ‘strongholds’ in v. 11.
Pass over to Chittim] Luli,
king of Zidon, had already sought
refuge in Cyprus; see Introd.
Thou shalt have no rest] For
the long arm of Assyria will reach
them even there. The importance
of Cyprus as a naval station was
recognised by the Babylonians
fifteen or sixteen centuries B.C.
The inscription of Sargon, king of
Agadé, relates how ‘the sea of the
setting sun he crossed,’ and in the
third year conquered a land which
can hardly be any other than Cyprus,
as Mr. Boscawen has pointed out.
The inscription is translated in
part by Mr. G. Smith, 7. S. B. A., ii.
49-51. Cyprus was also, as we have
seen, conquered by the Assyrian
Sargon.

18-The prophet concludes by
pointing to a recent event, fore-
shadowing the fate of Phoenicia.

speaks of the /azd of Chaldea; in
the second, of its capital—Babylon,
the fall of which involves that of
the land. ‘The subject in the latter
partis throughout Assyria. For the
change of number, comp. v. 23, 26.
Chaldea] On the form Kasdim,
seecrit. note. ‘Inthe cuneiform docu-
ments Kaldi is a tribe of the great
nation of Accad, which became en-
tirely predominant in the southern
provinces [on the lower Euphrates]
from the ninth century B.c., but
certainly existed previously’ (Lenor-
mant). ‘ Under Merodach-Baladan
[they] made themselves so impor-
tant and integral a part of its
(Babylonia’s) population as to give
their name to the whole country’
(Sayce). There is, therefore, no
historical reason why Isaiah should
not have used the term ‘land of
Kasdim’ for Babylonia, the con-
quest of which by Sargon might
not unnaturally be referred to in
this connection (see Introd.). For
other, now antiquated, views, see
Notes and Criticisms, pp. 22-26.
——For desert-beasts] Comp.
xill, 21, xxxiv. 14, Jer. 1 39, Ps.
Ixxiv. 14, and, on the Heb. word,
see Notes and Criticisms. ——Their
towers] i.e, their siege-works.
——Laid low] Lit., laid bare (the
foundations of ).

15-18 Vet seventy years, and Tyre
shall be restored to prosperity, and
devote herprofits to Jehovah. Comp.

CHAP. XXIIL] ISATAH. 143

Tyre shall be forgotten seventy years, as the days of one
king; at the end of seventy years it shall be unto Tyre as
in the song of the harlot: 1®‘ Take the lute, go round the city,
forgotten harlot! Play skilfully, sing many songs, that thou
mayest be remembered.’ ' And it shall come to pass that at
the end of seventy years the Lord shall visit Tyre, and she
shall return to her hire, and play the harlot with all kingdoms
of the earth on the face of the ground. '* And her earnings
and her hire shall be holy unto Jehovah; it shall not be
stored up nor hoarded, but to those who dwell before Jehovah
shall her earnings belong for sufficiency of eating and for

splendid clothing.

the appendix on the conversion of
Egypt, chapter xix——Seventy
years] Most expositorsregard these
seventy years as those of the Baby-
lonian captivity, according to Jer.
xxv. II, 12. But it is strange that
Isaiah should specify the duration
of the captivity in connection with
Tyre, and not with Judah. Isitnot
rather bold to suppose a lost pro-
phecy on the subject of the length
of the captivity, which is what these
expositors ought in consistency to
do, unless they are prepared to bring
down the appendix to the age of
Jeremiah ? It is surely allowable to
understand these seventy years as
a conventional expression for a
long period, just as ‘forty years’ is
used elsewhere : Ezek. xxix. 13 (see
Speakers Comm.) Seven is a
sacred number, and ‘the decade
denotes the fulfilment of times, after
which a new zon begins.’ ——_Asthe
days of one king| Meaning not
that there should really be only
one king during these seventy years,
but that the condition of Tyre
should remain as unchanged as if
there were, an Oriental king being
too proud to reverse a decree (Esth.
viii. 8).—_—The song of the harlot]
Evidently some well-known song,
a fragment of which follows. The
tone is evidently sarcastic; the
singer by no means anticipates that
the harlot will be ‘remembered !’
The prophet, however, applies the
song as if it were meant in earnest.
Commerce, as having regard to

purely worldly interests, is called
‘harlotry,’ comp. ‘ the iniquity of his
covetousness,’ Ivii. 17. A further
parallel between Tyre and the har-
lot or dayadére (ballatrix) of this
song lies in the conditionalness of
the renewal of prosperity. Com-
merce shall revive, but only as the
handmaid of religion.

18 Tyrian tribute promised for
the ‘city of the great king’ (Ps.
xlvili. 2) : tribute—not merely com-
mercial intercourse, such as the
Jews no doubt had with the Tyrians,
as Dean Plumptre reminds us,
after the captivity (Ezra iii. 7, Neh.
xiill. 16). A strange announce-
ment, says Del.; ec secundum
historiam necdum facta comperi-
mus, remarks St. Jerome. Holy
unto Jehovah] Inconsistent ap-
parently with Deut. xxiii. 18,
but the Biblical writers only
adhere to their metaphors so far
as suits their purpose. Not be
stored up] Comp. Zech. ix. 3, Joel
iii. 5. Those who dwell before
Jehovah] i.e., the people of Jerusa-
lem. It is not said ‘those who
stand before Jehovah ;’ that would
mean the priests. For suffi-
ciency of eating] Implying that
the prophet wrote at a time of
great scarcity, or when a scarcity
might be apprehended. This may
of course be harmonized with a
post-exile date (comp. Hag. i.,
Zech. viii. 12), but also with the
times of Isaiah (i. 7, ili. I, 7).

144 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXiv,

CHAPTERS XXIV.-XXVII.

AN imaginative picture of the overthrow of the mighty power which,
at the real or assumed period of the prophecy, held the Jews in bondage,
interwoven with descriptions of the unhappy state of God’s people prior
to their deliverance, and of the glorious lot reserved for them. This is
introduced by an equally imaginative picture of the Divine judgment
upon the whole world, and references to the world-wide extent of the
judgment recur at intervals. This is not the first time we have met with
an apparent identification of a temporary judgment upon the, Jews with
the great final judgment upon the world :—see on ii. 12, iii. 13, xiii. 9g. It
is, however, simply a combination and not a confusion. The Jews have
had special privileges ; they are the ‘house of God, and judgment natu-
rally ‘begins’ with them (comp. I Pet. iv. 17), and with the nations with
whom their fortunes have been linked.—The historical situation, it must
be candidly admitted, is described in highly enigmatical language (see
below), and it is not unnatural that some critics (both in Calvin’s day
and in our own) have denied its existence altogether. Among these Del.
and Naeg. may be specially mentioned, who regard this group of chapters
as throughout a symbolically expressed prediction of a still future judg-
ment upon the world, and to whom the ‘city of chaos’ is neither
Babylon, nor Susa, nor Jerusalem, but the centre (localise it where you
please) of the antitheistic world. Quod mihi nimis coactum videtur
(Calvin) ; the theory compels us to empty the most striking expressions
of their meaning, and is also contrary to the analogy of other prophe-
cies. On the other hand, the view adopted above is both natural in
itself, and is supported by the position of these chapters in the Book of
Isaiah. The latter point was clearly seen by Calvin. ‘As far as I can
judge,’ says he, ‘this prophecy is the close of all the preceding ones,
from chap. xiii. onwards. . Having as it were traversed all the regions
near to and known by the Jews, Isaiah briefly sums up their contents.
Even those who regard the prophecy as anonymous may recognise the
propriety of the place which it has received in the book. They will not
ot course agree with Naegelsbach that the prophet is here describing
the final stage in a great judgment of God upon the Gentile nations, of
which the denunciations in chaps. xiii.—xxiii. represent the preliminaries.
Looking at the prophecy as a whole in itself, not written for its present
position, however admirably it may fill it, they will rather regard the
judgment here denounced upon Israel’s enemies as the second stage in
the great trial, the Babylonian captivity being the first (‘thy chastening,’
xxvi. 16).

As for the vagueness or mysteriousness of the language, this ought to
be no difficulty to those who recognise in any degree the eschatological
purport of the prophecy. The more the authors of the prophetic or apo-
calyptic literature have their minds directed to the ‘latter days,’ the more
mysterious becomes their language, the greater their tendency to wide
and general expressions.

CHAP, XXIV.] ISAIAH. 145

1 Behold, Jehovah * will pour® out the ’ earth, and empty
it, and turn it upside down, and scatter its inhabitants ;? and
it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest ; as with the
servant, so with his master; as with the maid, so with her
mistress ; as with the buyer, so with the seller; as with the
lender, so with the borrower ; as with the taker, so with the
giver, of money. *%The earth shall be poured clean out, and
utterly spoiled, for Jehovah has spoken this word. ‘4 The
earth mourneth, it withereth; the world languisheth, it
withereth ; the highnesses of the people of the earth lan-
guish. ®The earth is become profane under its inhabitants,
for they have transgressed commandments, violated the
statute, broken the perpetual covenant; ®therefore hath a
curse devoured the earth, and those who dwell in it are dealt

® Poureth, Hitz. (See below).

1 Behold ... ] ‘Behold’ with
a participle, in the prophets, almost
always points to the future (iii. 1,
vii. 14, xvii. 1, &c.). This favours
the view of Ew., Del., Naeg., that
the whole of chap. xxiv. is predic-
tive. Others (Hitz., Knob., Kuenen,
&c.) take it as a description of
events which are actually taking
place; this may seem to be con-
firmed by the perfects. But surely
it suits the imaginative character
of the work better to regard these
as prophetic—as proceeding from
the point of view of one who had
attained a specially clear insight
into the eternal purposes of God.

2 So with the priest] It is in-
ferred by some that at the real or
assumed standing-point of this pro-
phecy the priests were the para-
mount power in Judah. It may be
so—there is the same prominence
given to the priests in Joel. But
perhaps the prophet selects those
simplest of relations which extend
to the lowest ranks of society.
Every one comes into contact with
a priest, but not every one witha
king.

3'spoilea] The prophet trans-
fers to the world a feature which
belongs properly to the fallen em-
pire of Israel’s oppressors.

VOL. I.

» Land, Ges. (So throughout),

5 The earth is become profane
.. J ‘For blood profaneth the
land” Num. xxxv. 33, comp. Ps.
cvi. 38. The blood-shedding by
which the great empires of the
East were founded (comp. xxvi. 21)
was a violation of that elementary
statute on which the perpetual
covenant with Noah and his sons
was based. The latter phrase
seems to be a direct allusion to
Gen. ix. 16:—it can hardly refer to
the special covenant of circumci-
sion (Gen, xvii. 13), or of the Sab-
bath (Ex. xxxi. 16), for it is a judg-
ment upon the earth exclusive of
Israel (see xxvi. 20, 21), which the
prophet is describing. The phrases
‘precepts, and ‘statute, mean
more than ‘the law written in the
heart’ (A.E., Del.), and are best
explained by the same passage in
Genesis. Obs., ‘commandments’
in the plural occurs only here in
Isaiah.

6 Jehovah has recalled his pro-:
mise not to bring a second deluge
upon the earth (see on v. 18).
A curse] Personified, as in Zech.
v. 3, Dan. ix. 11, Jer. xxiii. 10
(where there is almost the same
paronomasia). Comp. on ix. 8.
Are scorched] By the ‘ burn-
ing anger’ (xxx. 27) of Jehovah.

L

146 ISAIAL. [CHAP. XxXIy,

with as guilty, therefore the inhabitants of the earth are
scorched, and few men left. 7 The grapes mourn, the vine lan-
guisheth, all the merry-hearted do sigh. ® The joy of timbrels
is hushed ; the uproar of the exulting ones hath ceased; the
joy of the lute is hushed. %They shall not drink wine with
song; strong drink shall be bitter to those who drink it.
10 Broken to pieces is the city of chaos; every house is shut
up, not to be entered. "In the ‘fields is a crying because
of the wine; all gladness has set; the joy of the earth is

banished.
is battered into ruins.

Of the city there is left desolation, and the gate

13 For so shall it be within the earth in the midst of the

¢ Streets, Naeg.

78 Gesenius finds here an imi-
tation of Joel i. 10-12; Vitr.
compares a striking passage in the
prayer of Judah the Maccabee, 1
Mace. iii. 45, which he regards as
describing the fulfilment of this pre-
diction. Music at feasts, as v.12.

® Strong drink... ] i.e. arti-
ficial wine (see on v. 12). Under-
stand, ‘ If there be any ;’ otherwise
the description will be inconsistent.

10 The city of chaos] i.e., the
city which is destined to become
a very chaos (¢dhz), its outer and
inner order being destroyed, and
no germ of life remaining. It is
an allusion to the narrative (oral
or written) of the Creation ; comp.
‘And the earth was waste and
wild’ (tahi-va-bdhz), Gen. i. 2, It
is the most striking expression for
utter desolation which the prophet
could have chosen, and is specially
characteristic of the Book of Isaiah,
for 11 out of the 20 passages in
which it occurs in the Old Testa-
ment are in Isaiah. I ought to
add that of these II passages, Io
occur in prophecies of disputed
authorship.— Shut up] Inacces-
sible, owing to its ruinous condi-
tion.

11g erying because of the
wine] ‘Awake, ye drunkards, and
weep ; and howl, all ye drinkers of
wine, because of the sweet wine,
because it is cut off from your

mouth,’ Joel i. 5. Comp. also xv.
8-10. Hitz. remarks that v. 11 is
an wuda redundans of vv. 8, 9; and
v. 12 of VU. Io.

18 «For, in fact, the condition of
the world (or, possibly, of the re-
gion once ruled over by Israel’s
oppressors) will then be like that of
an olive-tree after the regular beat-
ing (xvii. 6), or of the vine-plants
when the vintage is over. There
will be indeed a remnant out of all
that multitude of ‘peoples, but how
small will be that remnant! Of
whom will it consist? Of the Jew-
ish nation, no doubt; but also of
some of the Gentiles ; for a kindred
prophet writes, ‘Whosoever shall
invoke the name of Jehovah shall
be delivered’ (Joel ii. 32). It must
be a part of this remnant, whose
chorus of praise to the God of Is-
rael echoes from the (Mediterra-
nean) sea (v. 14). But the survivors
are not all gathered in one place.
Hence they call upon other escaped
ones in the (distant) countries of
the sea (v. 15), to acknowledge
and to praise the hand of Jehovah.
The description is obscure, but
there is a general parallel in xlii.
10-12, where the various regions of
the earth—the (far) ‘countries’ are
also mentioned—are called upon to
praise Jehovah for his great work
of deliverance. Obs. in passing
the instance which v. 15 supplies

CHAP. XXIV.] ISAIAH, 147

peoples, as at the beating of the olive, as at the grape-gleaning
when the vintage is done. ' Those shall lift up their voice,
they shall ring out a cry;—because of Jehovah’s majesty they
shall shout aloud from the sea :—" ‘ Therefore in the 4 countries
glorify ye Jehovah ; in the countries of the sea the name of
Jehovah, Israel’s God!’ ‘From the skirt of the earth we
have heard songs, ‘ Honour (is come) for the righteous!’ But
I said, Wasting away is for me, wasting away is for me, alas

for me!
deal very barbarously.

upon thee, O inhabitant of the earth!

The barbarous deal barbarously, and the barbarous
7 A terror and a pit and a snare are

18 And it shall come

to pass that whoso fleeth from the report of the terror shall

4 So Lowth, Hitz.—Text, lights.
‘Notes and Criticisms,’ ad doc.

of that ascending rhythm, charac-
teristic of this prophecy—‘ in the
countries . . . in the countries of
the sea;’ comp. xxv. 5, xxvi. 3-7,
II, 15 (Judg, v,, Ps. xxix., cxxi.,
exxiv.). For howa Hebrew prophet
can have written ‘the lights’ (or
rather ‘the flames’) for ‘the East,’
is to me simply unintelligible,
and the comparison of lix. 19,
Iliad, xii. 239, does not lessen the
difficulty. A. E. has already the
right rend. ‘in the regions,’ though
he has to force it out of the received
text by comparing ‘ Ur of the Chal-
dees’ (as if ‘country of the Chal-
dees,’ ag Sept. of Gen. xi. 28). For
the rend, ‘countries,’ or ‘far lands,’
see on xl. 15.

16 A new song is heard ‘from the
skirt of the earth, viz. Honour for
the righteous! i.e., splendid is the
lot of the righteous’ (see Sept.),
the righteous being primarily the
Jews (as in xxvi. 2)—not Jehovah,
who is nowhere in O, T. simply
called ‘the righteous,’ nor said to
have honour or splendour, ‘glory’
being the word for Jehovah, ‘honour’
for the fairest of created things
(see Del.)—much less ‘the con-
queror’ (as Hilgenfeld, comparing
Zech. ix. 9, but wrongly). ‘we
have heard... But I said] In
recording the bright side of his
vision, the prophet had lost sight
of himself, and become identified in

Sept. omits D'9N3.

See discussion in my

feeling with the regenerate, ‘ right-
eous’ community ; but the interval
of misery to be passed through
before such blessedness can be
reached wrings from hima cry as of
personal pain, twice-repeated.
Wasting away (is) for me!] It
would seem that he laments the
sufferings actually undergone by the
Jews in his own time, just as the
Psalmist exclaims, in the name of
the pious Israelites, ‘My flesh hath
pined away, so that it hath no fat-
ness’ (Ps. cix. 24). Here, then, the
prophecy refers, not to the world’s
Judgment-day as a whole, but to
that single stage of it represented
by a particular period in the history
of the Jews (comp. on v. 3).——
The barbarous] i.e., primarily the
oppressors of the Jews, as xxi. 2
(note), xxxiii. 1.

17,18 The same language recurs
with little variation in Jer. xlviii.
43, 44 (of Moab). The prophet is
now occupied with the thought of
the world-wide extent of the cata-
strophe. No sooner will one cala-
mity be over, than anotherwillcome.
If Babylon is punished to-day, the
countries of the west will suffer
to-morrow.—For windows ... ]
Again has ‘all flesh corrupted its
way,’ and again must ‘all flesh be
cut off’ by a judgment not inferior
to Noah’s flood. Comp. Gen. vii.
Ir.

L2

148 ISAIAH, [cHaP. xxv,

fall into the pit ; and whoso cometh up out of the midst of
the pit shall be taken in the snare; for windows from the
height have opened, and the earth’s foundations do shake.
9 The earth is utterly broken ; the earth is utterly shattered ;
the earth tottereth exceedingly ; ®°the earth staggereth like
a drunkard, and moveth to and fro like a hammock ; and the
rebellion thereof is heavy upon it, and it shall fall, and not

rise again.

21 And it shall come to pass in that day that Jehovah shall
hold visitation upon the host of the height in the height, and

19 The language here imitates the

cracking and bursting with which
the present world shall pass away ;
for nothing less is the necessary
close of the judgment, so far as the
guilty parties are concerned (comp.
vu. 5).
#0 Bike a hammock] Like a
vineyard-watchman’s deserted ham-
mock, tossed to and fro by the
storm, till at last it is swept far
away. It shall fall] We must
remember that, according to the
Hebrew cosmology (and it was no
function of the prophets to correct
this), the earth was immovable.
Hence the destruction of the earth
is described as its ‘fall’ (comp.
xiii. 13). It 1s implied that there
shall be a ‘new heaven and a new
earth.’

21-23 ¢ Jehovah will overthrow the
kings of the earth and their celes-
tial patrons, and take the govern-
ment into his own hands.’ Shall
visit upon the host of the height]
‘The height’ is a synonym for
‘heaven’ (see uv. 18, xl. 26, lvii. 15),
and the ‘host of heaven’ is a con-
stant expression for either the an-
gels (1 Kings xxii. 19) or the stars
(Jer. xxxiii. 22). The meaning of
the ‘visitation’ is obscure; but
there is probably a parallel in Ps.
Ixxxii., where Bleek (and similarly
Kosters) rightly understand the
Elohim to be the patron-spirits of

the nations, who are threatened
with deprivation of their super-
human character, and death.. We
have an early interpretation of the
passage before us in Enoch xviii.
13-16 (with which comp. 2 Pet. ii.
4, Jude 6, Rev. xx. 2, 3): ‘And
horrible was that which I saw there;
seven stars, like great burning
mountains, and like spirits, which
besought me. The angel said, This
is the place where heaven and
earth are at an end; it serves for
a prison for the stars of heaven
and for the host of heaven. And
the stars which roll upon the fire
are those which transgressed the
command of God before their rising,
since they did not come in their
appointed time. And he became
wroth with them, and bound them
unto the time when their guilt
should be complete, in the year of
the secret.’ The Book of Job, too,
contains dark allusions to struggles
between Jehovah and the powers
of heaven, and the Babylonians
had various mythic stories of a war
between the sun and the storm-
demons (comp. on xxvii. 1). It is
a singularly dark allusion which
the prophet here makes to certain
rebellious denizens of the upper
regions, either stars or spirits, or
rather both together, the celestial
patrons of the nations of the world
(comp. on xxxiv. 4). Whether

1 Aben Ezra has already compared Dan. x. 13 (comp. vv. 20, 21), where the ‘ prince’
or guardian angel of Persia is said to withstand Michael, the guardian-angel of Israel
(Dan. xii. 1); see also Sirach xvii. 14 (t7), and Deut. xxxii, 8, Sept. (‘he set the bounds
of the nations according to the number of the angels of God').—With regard to Ps.
Ixxxii, see Kosters, Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1876, p. 125.

149

upon the kings of the earth on the earth. * And they shall
be gathered ® as captives are gathered ® into the pit, and shut
up in the prison, and after many days they shall be visited.
23 And the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed,
for Jehovah Sabdoth hath become king in mount Zion and in
Jerusalem, and before his elders shall be glory,

© See crit, note.

CHAP. XXV_] ISAIAH.

these are to be imagined as seduc- the ‘host of heaven.’ For these

ing the earthly kings to evil (Del.),
I cannot say ; there is, at any rate,
a mysterious relation between the
fate of the heavenly and of the
earthly powers, as there is between
the fate of the angels and of the
churches in Rev. i.-iii. ‘ All things
are double, one against the other.’
2 pit] i.e, dungeon, as Ex. xii.
29: the prophet probably means
Shedl. In Enoch xviii. 14-16 the
stars find a prison in space.——
They shall be visited] In a good
or a bad sense? Authorities are
divided. Jerome, Rashi, Vitr., Ges.,
lean to the sense of punishing ;
Pesh., Aben Ezra, Calv., Hitz., Ew.,
Del., to that of pardoning (as xxiii.
17; comp. 15). It is difficult, how-
ever, to see why there should be
two punishments—unless, ‘after the
manner of men,’ we suppose some
treasonable plotting against Jeho-
vah’s government ; and it is more
in accordance with the analogy of
prophecy that the vanquished kings
should cast their crowns before the
throne of God. We need not
trouble ourselves about the mean-
.ing of the ‘ visitation,’ as applied to

were merely mentioned because of
their connection with the ‘kings of
the earth’—a connection which was
only broken by the imprisonment
of the latter. The kings when re-
leased will be no longer kings, but
humble subjects. — This passage
early excited the curiosity of Chris-
tian readers. It has contributed
the release, as xxvii. I contributed
the final destruction, of the ‘dragon,’
to the picture in Rev. xx. I-10, and
was considered by the Origenists
(see Jerome ad Joc.) to favour their
opinion of the future salvation of
the evil spirits.

23 Wath become king] So Mic,
v.7. It is the phrase for coming to
the throne, 2 Sam. v. 4, 1 Kings xv.
1, &c. Hitherto Israel had been
subject to ‘other lords’ (xxvi. 13),
or at best to Jehovah’s human repre-
sentatives.—And before... ]
The ‘elders’ are the representatives
of the people (see on ili, 2). These
shall be admitted to a direct in-
tuition of the Divine glory, like the
seventy elders of old (Ex. xxiv. 9,
10), and shall carry the reflection of
it wherever they go (Ex. xxxiv. 29).

CHAPTER XXV.

THE judgment upon all the enemies of Jehovah having been consum-
mated, the prophet, in the name of believing Israel, offers praise to God.

The hymn reminds us of chap. xii.

1 Jehovah ! thou art my God ; I will exalt thee, I will give
thanks to thy name; for thou hast done wonderful things—

1 yhou art my God... | The

expressions (or, conceivably, his ex-

prophet uses already consecrated pressions became consecrated). Ex,

150 ISAIAH. [CHAP, Xxv.

far off counsels —perfect faithfulness. *For thou hast made
a citadel into a heap, a fortified city into a ruin, a castle of
foreigners to be no city, not to be built again. * Therefore
fierce peoples glorify thee, cities of terrible nations fear thee ;
‘for thou hast been a fortress to the weak, a fortress to the
poor in his distress, a refuge from the storm, a shadow from
the heat ; for the blast of the terrible ones was like a storm
against a wall. °As heat in a parched land, thou subduest
the uproar of foreigners ; as heat by the shadow of clouds, the

song of terrible ones is brought low.
®And Jehovah Sabdoth shall make unto all peoples in
this mountain a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the

xv. 2, 11, Ps. exviil. 28, cxlv. 1.
Far off counsels] Purposes eter-
nally conceived (xxii. 11, xxxvii. 26) ;
or, prophecies long since uttered

(‘counsellor,’ xli. 28). The plural
marks width of range.
? Thou hast made . ] Not,

I think, a mere generalisation from
God’s providential dealings (comp.
Ps. evil. 33), but either the mystic
Babylon, which is yet to be revealed
(virtually the view of Del.), or—
which seems easier—the chief city of
Israel’s oppressors. Comp. xxiv. 10.

8 The remnant of the oppressors
of the Jews (comp. v. 4 4) shall be
terrified into submission to Jehovah
(comp. Rev. xi. 13); or, perhaps,
nations like-minded with those may
be referred to, comp. lix. 19. ——
Fierce peoples] The rend. is jus-
tified by the plural verb, and by the
plural noun in the parallel line.

4 Against a wall] Lit, of a
wall. I doubt if this phrase can be
correct. It is almost too concise
to be intelligible, and if correctly
explained (as e.g. by Del.), ‘beating
vainly against a wall,’ scarcely suits
the context. It is the violence, not
the ineffectualness, of the attack
which needs emphasising.

6 zn this mountain! Mount
Zion (xxiv. 23), where the author
dwells.—vnto all peopies] Mem-
bers of all nations, therefore, will
be incorporated into the people of
Jehovah (comp. Matt. viii. 11), and
enjoy its privileges. Fear in their

case will pass into grateful love.
——A feast of fat things] An
image of the highest spiritual and
temporal blessings (see on lv. 1),
not improbably suggested by the
sacrificial meal connected with the
Shélem (thank- or peace-offering),
as Ps. xxil. 26,29. According to the
Levitical law the fat pieces of the
victim were to be devoted to Jeho-
vah immediately by burning, and
the next best piece, the breast,
mediately by giving it to His ser-
vants the priests (Lev. vii. 31) ; and
the Messianic prophecy, Jer. xxxi.
14, is in substantial harmony with
this arrangement. In this case it
is presupposed that the offerer of
the Shélem is the host, and Jehovah
the guest (Oehler, O. Zest. Theology,
ii. 8). But in the coming age, our
author seems to imply, God Himself
will be the host, and all—priests
and laity alike—will be His guests,
and receive the choicest gifts: He
will require nosacrifice buta broken
heart. A similar image occurs in
Pirge A both, iii.25,iv.23(ed. Taylor).
In the latter passage, the present
age (‘dlam, aidv) is described as
‘the vestibule’ leading to the ¢vzci-
nium or banquet-hall, ie., the age to
come. The Messianic age was to
be unending, and so too it is implied
here that the feast wjll be (see v. 8).
—To understand the full force of
the image of the Shélem we must
remember that the meal which fol-
lowed the sacrifice was a highly

CHAP. XXV.] ISAIAH.

151
lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well-
strained. 7 And he shall annihilate in this mountain the
covering which covereth all peoples, and the web which is
woven over all nations ; *he shall annihilate death for ever,
and the Lord Jehovah shall wipe away tears from off all
faces, and the reproach of his people shall he take away from
off all the earth; for Jehovah hath spoken it. ® And they
shall say in that day, Behold, here is our God, for whom we

have waited that he should save us;

whom we have waited ;
tion.

festive occasion. ‘True, the eucha-
ristic meals of the Jews, like those
of the early Christians (1 Cor. xi.
21) often degenerated into sensual
merrymakings (1 Sam. i. 13, where
Eli suspects Hannah of being drunk
after a sacrificial meal, comp. wv. I0 ;
so too Prov. vii. 14-18), but mode-
rate enjoyment was a duty (Deut.
xii. 7). Obs. There is no analogy to
this form of belief in Zoroastrianism.
——'Wines on the lees| i.e., wine
that has been left on its lees or
sediment, to heighten its strength
and flavour ; comp. Jer. xlvili. 11,
and see note in Lowth’s Jsazah.

7 The covering ... nations]
‘A net (ie. mortality) is spread
over all the living, Pzrge Adboth,
iii, 16 ; comp. next verse. David
‘wept as he went up, and had his
head covered’ (a sign of mourning),
2 Sam. xv. 30. ‘ Your (spiritual)
eyes hath he closed, and your heads
hath he covered,’ Isa. xxix. 10. All
these are in point, and we must not
specialise too much. All ‘darkness,’
whether without or within, inter-
cepts the ‘light of Jehovah :’ espe-
cially death, for, from the old He-
brew point of view, ‘in Death no
man remembereth thee.’ Comp. 2
Tim. i. 10, where death is described
as a power or principle which over-
shadowed theworld, till Jesus Christ
‘abolished death and brought life
and immortality to light.’

® annihilate death] The pro-
mise belongs not only to the Jewish
nation (as Hos. xiii. 14) as a com-
munity, but to all its believing indi-

here is Jehovah, for

let us exult and rejoice in his salva-
10 For the hand of Jehovah shall rest upon this moun-

vidual members: this is a neces-
sary inference from the individualis-
ing reference of the next clause(‘“..
from off all faces’), Comp. on xxvi.
19. It is a different prospect which
is held out for the citizens of the new
Jerusalem in Ixv. 20. But even there
the death which is still the portion
ot believers has completely lost its
sorrowful associations. It is only
to the wicked that it will be a
curse. But why does the prophet
add, He shall wipe away tears?
What place is left for tears? Per-
haps he remembers those to whom
death comes as a blessing, who, as
Job (iil. 21) and Dante (Caf i iii, 46)
tell us, have the ‘longing’ and the
‘hope’ of death. He concludes
with a special promise for the Jews,
who, in their world-wide dispersion
(comp. Joel iii. 2), were nowhere
secure from the taunt, Where is
thy God? (Ps. Ixxix. 10). This re-
proach of his people shall he
take away.

® A brief strain from the hymn
of the redeemed.

10-12 A contrast. The happy state
of the Jews is resumed in the words,
For on this mountain shall the
hand of Jehovah rest—protect-
ingly (xi. 2) for his people, but
vengefully for his enemies. True,
the mightiest of these have been
destroyed, but the petty foes of the
Jews were regarded with intensified
hatred. Hence the declaration, in
a contemptuous figure drawn from
common life, that Moab shall be
trampled down in his place. The

152 ISAIAH, [CHAP. XXVL

tain, and Moab shall be trampled down in his place, as straw
is trampled down in the water of a dung-pit ; !! and *he shall
spread out his hands within it, as a swimmer spreadeth out
(his hands) to swim, but he shall abase his* pride together
with the artifices of his hands. ' And the fortifications of
thy lofty walls shall he cast down, abase, and bring to the

ground, even to the dust.

® (God)...

latter words are not merely exple-
tive ; they imply that Moab cannot
possibly escape (Del.). Is there a
historical background to this? Pro-
bably, though we are not able to
determine it with precision. There
are, it is true, some evidences of a
friendly intercourse with Moab in
the post-Isaianic period (Jer. xxvii.
3, xl. 11). But, on the other hand,
we are told that bands of Moabites
ravaged Judah during the reign of
Jehoiakim (2 Kings xxiv. 2), and
Moab is accused of maliciously
triumphing at the ruin of their
neighbours, Ezek. xxv. 8-11. San-
ballat, too, was probably a Moabite
(see on xv. 5).——Dung-pit] Hebr.
madménah ; possibly an allusion
to the local name Madmen, Jer.
xlvili. 2, if we should not there read
gam dimon instead of gam madmen.

. its, Targ., Aben Ezra, Vitr., Kay.

1 Moab shall spread out his
hands to prevent himself from
sinking in the water. (Vitr. and
Dr. Kay, with Targ., A. E., &c.,
make Jehovah the subject. The
image will then be analogous to
that of ‘riding on the high places,
but does not harmonise with the
figure in vw. 10).——His pride
Comp. on xvi. 6. ret bae
Yet I rather doubt whether ‘snares’
can be so paraphrased. Is the text
right ?

The fortifications] Most ex-
plain this of Kir Moab, or of the
cities of Moab in general; Vitr. and
Ges., of Babylon. I think it refers
at any rate to the ‘city’ mentioned
in Xxiv. 10-12, xxv. 2, and especially
(note the expressions) xxvi. 5. It
is possible that the verse is mis-
placed.

CHAPTER XXVI.

FuTuRE glory, and the discipline by which it is obtained.

'TIn that day shall this song be sung in the land of Judah:
‘A city of strength is ours; salvation doth he appoint for
walls and outworks: ?open ye the gates, that a righteous

2 A third hymn. The picture
is purely ideal. The new Jerusalem
has no need of walls, and yet there
is a mention of gates ; it is already
rebuilt, and yet there is an invita-
tion to those who are to inhabit
it (Reuss). Ewald, it is true,
thinks the gates are those of the
temple (as Ps. cxvili. 19, 20), but

there is the same (as I venture to
think) happy inconsistency in Ix.
11, 18. Salvation] See note on
xii. 2.

* Open ye the gates .. .] The
call proceeds from heaven, comp.
xl. 1-6. Of Jehovah himself we
read that ‘he observeth faithful-
ness’ (Ps, xaxi, 23, Del.).

CHAP. XXVI_] ISAIAH. 153
nation, that keepeth faithfulness, may enter in” **A pur-
pose established thou purposest—* peace, peace, for in thee is
his trust. ‘Trust ye in Jehovah for ever, for in Jah Jehovah
ye have a Rock of Ages. °For he hath cast down those who
dwelt on high, the lofty city ; he hath abased it, he hath
abased it to the earth; he hath brought it even to the dust.
6 The foot trode it down, even the feet of the afflicted, the
steps of the weak. ‘The path for the righteous is plain ; thou
makest plain with a level the path of the righteous. ° Yea,

® A stedfast mind thou keepest in, Del, Kay.—Firm is the hope; thou wilt

form, Ew.

3a purpose established] ‘ Faith-
ful is the saying’ (1 Tim.i.15). ‘All
his commandments are true; they
are established (same word) for ever
and ever’ (Ps. cxi. 7,8). ‘For I
know the thoughts which I think
concerning you... thoughts of
peace’ (Jer. xxix. 11). Obs.,through-
out this first paragraph (vv. 1-4),
the writer's mind is running on the
security and immovableness of the
new Jerusalem. This thread of
thought is to some extent broken
by alt. rendering, which has, how-
ever, in its favour the (only) ap-
parent parallel of Ps. cxii. 7, 8, ‘His
heart is fixed, trusting in Jehovah:
Established is his heart, he shall
not be afraid.’ The other passage
sometimes quoted in its support is
Phil. iv. 7, where A. V. has ‘ The
peace of God... . shall keep your
hearts and minds,’ but vonyara is
rather ‘ purposes’ (Ellicott, Alford).
It may tempt some to compare
the use of the word yc¢ser in later
Hebrew, in which it is sometimes
used synonymously with /¢, a heart.
But its proper meaning in such pas-
sages, which is almost always suit-
able, is ‘impulse, desire.——For
Ppurposest some would _ render
‘keepest,’ supposing a play on the
two meanings of the verb—‘ keep’
and ‘frame’; this implies a violent
rendering of the first two words,—
‘ Well-founded is the thought’
(Calv., Hitz.).-—-Peace, peace]
He refrains from epithets. Such
peace is indescribable :--so lvii.

19.

4 xn Jah... ] For the form of
the phrase, comp. Kordn iv. 47, ‘in
God there is a sufficient patron.’

> ‘Rock’ is a Divine title (xxx.
29). Asa proof of Jehovah’s right
to it in all its manifold significance,
the prophet points to the fate of
the imperial city (as in xxiv.). Obs.,
the increased rapidity of movement
in the style. The feet of the
afflicted] i.e, of God’s people.
The same word in Hebr. expresses
poverty and humble-mindedness
(the supposed distinction between
‘ani and ‘anazv cannot be made out);
thesame word, plainness or straight-
ness, and uprightness.

7 Jehovah, who tolerates no ob-
stacle on his own pathway (xl. 3,
4), will suffer none on that of his
people. A plain path is theirs,
free from trouble without and
within. This is expressed in the
style of the Proverbs; see Q. P. B.
Prov. iii. 6, xi. 5, xv. 19, and the
Hebr. of Prov. v. 6. ——With a
level] i.e., exactly, to a nicety.

8 Again the lyric tone. The
Church is the speaker. ‘ Indeed,
knowing this—that thou hadst a
hatred of all that exalted itself, we
looked out for thee to traverse the
earth in the path of thy judg-
ments, those judgments’ which,
according to the prophets, were to
open the Messianic period. For
thy name] i.e., almost ‘for thy
manifestation” but ‘name’ means
not so much an act of self-mani-
festation as that side of the Divine
Being which is turned towards

154

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XXVI.

in the path of thy judgments, Jehovah! we waited for thee;
for thy name and for thy memorial there was heartfelt desire.
*With my soul I desired thee in the night; yea, with my
spirit within me I sought thee earnestly ; for as soon as thy
judgments come upon the earth, the inhabitants of the world

will learn righteousness.

l0Tf the wicked be treated favour-

ably, he learneth not righteousness ; in a land of rectitude he
dealeth unjustly, and hath noeye for the majesty of Jehovah.
" Jehovah! thy hand hath been lifted up, (but) they saw it
not ; they shall see—and be ashamed—the jealousy for the
people ; yea, ° fire shall devour thine adversaries,” '? Jehovah!

> Let the fire of thine enemies devour them, Ew.

man (comp. Ps. xx. 1, and see on
xxx. 27, lxill. 9). The term is com-
mon as a Divine title to Hebrew
and Phcenician: comp. ‘ Astarte,
name of Baal,’ /ascr. of Eshmun-
azar (ed. Schlottmann), vii. 9, and
see Last Words, vol. ii. Me-
morial] a synonym for name (so
also in Assyrian), Ex. iii. 15, Ps.
cxxxv. 13, comp. Hos, xii. 5.

® Soul. . . spirit] On the dis-
tinction, see Oehler, Old Test.
Theology, i. 216-220, As soon
as... ] It was not, then, merely
a selfish patriotism which moved
the prophet, but a genuine interest
in ‘righteousness.’ But this does
not exhaust the meaning of the
passage. It is the Messianic hope
which we have before us. The
spread of righteousness over the
earth is connected with the coming
of Jehovah to ‘reign on mount
Zion’ (xxiv. 23), and this advent is
to be ushered in by a series of
judgments on the unbelievers and
unrighteous. ‘Righteous’ =a wor-
shipper of Jehovah ; ‘unrighteous’
virtually = heathen, see Del. on Ps.
cxxv. 3. Notice two indications
of the point of time at which the
author places himself: 1. The Jews
are in constant intercourse with the
heathen; 2. They suffer, not merely
by their political subjugation (v. 13),
but by the moral gulf between them-
selves and the heathen. Compare
the Psalms assim.

10 The thought of v. 9 is enforced.

If judgment be withheld, the un-
godly will not learn ‘ righteousness.’
——A land of rectitude] ie, a
place where the upright dwell. Ps.
cxliii. 10 is not a parallel passage.

11 Hath bee lifted up] viz.,
against the enemies of Israel
(comp. Ex. vi. 1)——But they
saw it not] ‘See’ has two mean-
ings, ‘to see’ with the eyes, and ‘to
feel’ with the whole nature. Both
are united here: ‘they saw it not,’
because ‘they felt it not, not
being the objects of those Divine
judgments. Jealousy for the
people] So ‘the zeal of thy house’
(Ps. Ixix. 9, A.V.) should be ‘jea-
lousy for thy house.’ The clause
means more exactly, They shall see
what jealousy for a people (bound,
as Israel is, to its God) means.
Fire] ‘Shall thy jealousy burn
like fire?’ Ps. Ixxix. 5, comp. Zeph.
i. 18. Ewald strangely compares
2 Kings i. 10, Alt. rend. means,
‘the hre with which thou punishest
thy enemies.’ But the analogy of
‘jealousy for the people’ now de-
cides me against it. The construc-
tion adopted is, however, uncom-
mon and harsh (see Knobel).——.
Our work] The work of our deli-
verance.——For us] The same
thought is expressed in Ps. xc.
16, 17, where ‘thy deed’ =‘ the
work of our hands.’—In this and
the next two verses, the prophet
assumes the liberation of the Jews
to have been accomplished.

CHAP. XXVI.] ISAIAH.

155

thou wilt stablish peace for us, for all our work also thou hast
wrought for us. ' Jehovah our God! other lords beside thee
have had dominion over us ; only through thee do we cele-
brate thy name. "The dead live not (again), the shades
rise not ; therefore thou hast visited and destroyed them, and
made all their memory to perish. '° Thou hast increased the
nation, Jehovah! thou hast increased the nation ; thou hast
won for thyself glory ; thou hast made distant all the boun-
daries of the land. ‘Jehovah! in trouble they looked for

18 Other lords] Jehovah was the
rightful ‘lord’ of Israel (comp.
Ixiii. 19); Nineveh and Babylon
had usurped his place. Another
view (Hitz. Oehler) is that ‘lords’
=gods. This involves interpreting
‘the dead’ in v. 14 of the generation
of idolatrous Jews. In its favour
may be urged the further light
which the passage will then throw
on the prophet’s belief in the Resur-
rection. Inv. 19 he exclaims, ‘ Thy
dead (O Jehovah) shall arise,’ i.e.,
the believing Israelites shall re-
turn to life, and help to people the
regenerate earth. In v. 14 he pre-
pares the way for this by excluding
unbelievers from a share in the
future bliss. On the ordinary ex-
planation, the outburst of faith in
v. 19 is a little abrupt, and revela-
tion does not disdain those psy-
chological processes by which the
mind is fitted for fresh intuitions
of Divine truth. Still I do not see
how v. 14 can fairly be interpreted
as Oehler (Old Test. Theology, ii.
393) proposes, and (unless by vio-
lent means) the latter half of v. 13
is incapable of being reconciled
with his view. Only through
thee] Only through thine inter-
position. Comp. Ps, lvi. 4, 10.
Celebrate] The word may mean
no more than ‘ invoke’ (Ex. xxiii.
13), but more probably it implies
thanksgiving for a benefit received,
as Ps. xlv. 17 (18). Of course a
mere invocation of Jehovah was
possible during the Exile.

4,15 A sudden flight into the
prophetic future. All foreign lords
have passed away ; they are in the

realm of the shades, from which—
except by a miracle—none returns
(Job xvi. 22); their very memory
has perished. Cf. xiv. 22, Jer. li. 39.
Meantime Jehovah has increased
the population of Judah, and widely
extended its borders (cf. xxxiii. 17).
In fact, the territory occupied at
first by the restored exiles was
extremely limited ; the ideal was
still in the future. Therefore }
i.e., with this result. Hebrew can-
not clearly distinguish between that
which merely contributes to a re-
sult and that which is worked pur-
posely for that result: it has no
word for ‘consequently.’ Comp.
Winer, New Test. Gram., pp. 573-4;
but obs. that this idiom occurs in
some passages in which a theistic
teleology cannot be traced.

16-18 The prophet returns to the
gloomy past and _present.——
Looked for thee] Or, remembered
thee. Poured out prayers]
The rendering is doubtful, and the
text has the appearance of corrupt-
ness. Sept. has ‘in small afflic-
tion (was) thy discipline unto us.’
Altering a point, Bottcher renders
the present text, ‘affliction (was)
the charm of thy discipline for
them,’ i.e, affliction acted like a
charm by bringing them back
under thy discipline. This, indeed,
is not free from difficulty, but ‘af-
fliction’ is probably the meaning
of the first word, rendered above
‘they poured out.’ ‘Charm’ (for
this, not ‘ prayers,’ is the primary
meaning of the second word) can
hardly be right ; unless (assuming
the late origin of the prophecy) the

156

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XXVI.

thee ; they °poured out prayers (?),° when thy chastening

came to them.

17 As she who is with child, and near her de-

livery, writhes, and cries out in her pangs, such were we be-

cause of thee, Jehovah!

18 We were with child, we writhed,

we brought forth as it were wind; we made not the land
salvation, neither were inhabitants of the world produced.

194 Thy dead shall live ; my dead bodies shall arise.4

¢ See below.

old word for ‘charm’ (iii. 3), or
amulet (iii. 20), acquired some new
meaning in the religion of the Cap-
tivity, possibly not unconnected
with the Babylonian incantations.
For not even a prophet can disen-
gage himself from the phraseology
and mental imagery of his age.
The ordinary rendering ‘ whispered
prayers’ seems to me now unsuit-
able. Inthe next verse, the Jews
are represented as crying out vehe-
mently, and such, too, is the lan-
guage of those psalms which seem
to express the feelings of the exiles.

17 As she who is with child] A
figure for intense anxiety (as xiii.
8, xxi. 3). Contrast another figu-
rative description, ‘ Before she tra-
vailed, she brought forth’ (Ixvi. 7).
Because of thee] i.e., because
of thy hand (Jer. xv. 17).

'8 wind] i.e., that which was
futile and useless (xli.29). Orthere
may be an allusion to apparent

pregnancy, and its result (e7-
pueumatosis),——Salvation] 1.¢.,
thoroughly safe or prosperous.

The following clause expresses the
disappointment of the later Jews
at the scanty population of Judea.
I must again remark that the

real or assumed period of the
author is after the return from
exile. Inhabitants of the
world] Perhaps this certainly

strange expression alludes to the
pre-eminent position soon to be en-
joyed by the regenerate Israel in a
regenerate world.— Were .

produced] Lit., fell :—a unique ex-
pression for being born (see, how-
ever, Wisd. vii. 3, and comp. the
use of mimrw and Arab. sagata,
Ges.). We do meet (e.g., Job iil.

Awake
° Let thy dead.... Ew.

16) with the substantive ‘that
which falls’ (#éfel) for ‘a birth,
but only in the sense of an ‘un-
timely birth.’ The prophet selects
the term to express the abnormal
and violent character of this second
birth of the deceased Israelites (see
next verse). So Oehler, Old Test.
Theology, ii. 396.

9 Thy dead] Contrast v. 14, ‘the
dead (oppressors) live not again.’
—Shall live]i.e., live again. The
late Hebrew for the Resurrection
is ?khiyyath hamméthim, ‘the re-
vival of the dead.’ ‘Sublimely re-
covering himself, the prophet cries
that God’s saints, though they are
dead, shall live’ (M. Arnold), and
shall share the duties and the pri-
vileges of regenerate Israel. The
passage has a strong affinity to
Hos. vi. 2: ‘After two days will
he revive us; on the third day he
will raise us up, and we shall live
in his sight,” and Ezek. xxxvii.
1-10 (the ‘dry bones’). The three
passages agree in connecting the
Resurrection with the circumstances
of the Jewish community. This is
very clear in Hosea and Ezekiel,
but is hardly less certain in the
passage before us. It is as ‘my
dead body’ (or, ‘the part of me
that has faded and fallen off me’)
that the departed Israelites are
summoned from the underworld.
The difference is that the descrip-
tions in Hosea and Ezekiel are al-
legorical (comp. Hos. vi. 1, Ezek.
XXXVI. 27, XXXvil. II-I4), whereas
the whole context of our passage
(especially v. 14) shows that the
language of the writer is to be taken
literally. It is in fact an expres-
sion of faith ina resurrection, though

CHAP, XXVI.]

ISAIAH.

157

and cry for joy, ye dwellers in the dust, for a dew of °lights

is thy dew, and the earth shall produce the shades.

20 Go,

my people, into thy chambers, and shut thy door behind
thee ; hide thyself for a little moment, until the indignation
e Herbs, Kimchi, Vitr.

in a resurrection as exceptional
as those of which we read in the
Books of Kings. On the question
of the relation of the Biblical doc-
trine of the Resurrection to the
Zoroastrian, I have spoken else-
where (J. C. A., p. 130). I will
only add, that we must not quote
the covert opposition to Dualism
which most critics find in xlv. 7
(see, however, note) as conclusive
against the origination of the doc-
trine of the Resurrection in Persia.
For the doctrine of Dualism is
plainly inconsistent with Mono-
theism ; that of the Resurrection
is not. (Comp. Geiger, Jd. Zezt-
schrift, 1872, p. 270.) Why, more-
over, hunt for Persian affinities ?
The Babylonians too believed in
the Resurrection ; they ascribed it
to the favour of Marduk, who (as
a solar deity) himself died and rose
again. See Hymn to Marduk,
Lenormant, Les premzéres crviltsa-
tions, ii.177-8. 1 do not, of course,
dream of claiming a Babylonian
origin for the doctrine. Psycho-
logically speaking, the revelation of
it to the Israelites was prepared for
by their earnest beliefin retribution.
Rewards and punishments for good
and evil conduct being so imper-
fectly awarded in this life, faith in-
ferred a second, and life to be com-
plete required a body. Besides,
the vague and incidental character
of the reference in this passage is
of itself a warrant of its underived
origin. And now to return to the
prophet. If the reader has any
further doubt as to the meaning of
the passage, let him refer to Ixvi.
7-9, Ezek. xxxvi. 38, which prove
how much the prophetic writers
dwelt on the question of the re-
population of the sacred territory.
Comp. also Prof. Drummond’s re-
marks, The Jewish Messzah, p. 361.

Wily dead bodies] The Heb.
is in the sing., collectively (as Lev.
xi. 11, Ps. xxix. 2). Awake and
ery] Lively faith anticipating the
event. Thy dew...] The
‘dew’ here corresponds to the life-
giving ‘wind’ in Ezek. xxxvii., as
the ‘dead bodies’ here to the ‘ dry
bones’ there. The figure may be
expanded thus:—The vivifying
energy of Jehovah'is like dew—
not the common dew, but ‘dew
of lights,’ i.e., the essential, super-
nal light (comp. James i. 17, Del.),
which according to the- primitive
belief, Hebrew, Egyptian, Persian,
Indian, existed before the sun (see
Gen. i, 3, Job xxxviii, 19, xxv.
3, and comp. art. ‘ Cosmogony,’
Encyclop. Britannica, ninth ed.).
Light and life are correlative ideas
—Ps. xxxvi. 9, Job iii. 16-20, John
i. 4; but light is a more pictorial
expression, and a more suitable
companion for dew. The prophet
means to say, ‘ Thy dew, O Jeho-
vah, is so full of the light of life that
it even draws forth the shades from
the dark womb of the underworld.’
Alt. rend. means ‘a dew like that
which falls upon plants’; comp.
Hos. xiv. 5, Ps. Ixxii. 6. The
earth shall produce] Lit., cause
to fall (comp. v. 18). The earth is
likened to a devouring monster,
Num. xiii. 32, Ezek. xxxvi. 13, like
Sheol (see on v. 14).

*0 The rapture is over, and the
prophet returns to the sober present.
He has gained on behalf of his
people the comforting certitude
that a great exhibition of the
Divine justice is on the point of
taking place; and his counsel is to
withdraw from the doomed world
into the privacy of communion
with God (Ps. xxvii. 5, xxxi. 21,
Del.). For even the righteous man
shall only ‘live in virtue of his

158

shall have passed by.

ISATAH,

[CHAP. XXVII.

21 For behold, Jehovah cometh out of

his place to visit the guilt of the earth’s inhabitants upon
them ; and the earth shall disclose her bloodshed, and shall

no more cover her slain.

trust’ in Jehovah (Hab. ii. 4 ?)
For a little moment. . . ] Paral-
lel passage, x. 25.

2! For behold, &c.] The same
expressions in Mic. i. 3——Shall
disclose . . . her slain] The
latter clause by itself might be
taken as a prediction of a resur-
rection ; but with the words which
precede it, it can only be taken as

a strong expression for the inner
necessity of vengeance for blood.
Comp. Gen. iv. 11, Job xvi. 18.
A fine application in Macaulay, vii.
33 (field of Landen). The whole
stress of the verse lies on the pu-
nishment of the actually existing
inhabitants of the earth.—The de-
scription of the judgment follows
in the next chapter.

CHAPTER XXVII.

1TIn that day shall Jehovah visit with his sword, the hard,
and great, and strong, the leviathan the fugitive serpent, and

1 Further details on ‘that day,’
expressed, with the fearless security
characteristic of the prophets, in
phraseology of mythic origin. The
object is to throw into relief the
terriblenessof Jehovah’s vengeance,
which is effected by clothing the an-
nouncement in language originally
used of the storm-cloud. The sword
of Jehovah (xxxi. 8, xxxiv. 5, Ixvi.
16, Deut. xxxii. 41, 42, Jer. xii. 12,
xlvi. 10, xlvii. 6, 1. 35-38, Ezek. xxi.
9 (14), Zech. xiii. 7, Judg. vii. 20,
comp. Josh. v. 13) is described more
fully in Gen. iii. 24 as the ‘turning
sword by the cherubim,’ and the
cherub is undoubtedly a symbol
connected with the storm-cloud (see
Encycl. Brit., art. ‘Cherubim’).
The Babylonians had their parallel
(as was first shown by Lenormant")
in the sword of fifty points and
seven heads belonging to the god
Marduk, which obviously means
the lightning. The other imagery
of the verse belongs to the same

order of conceptions. It is impos-
sible to help comparing the fourth
tablet of the Babylonian creation-
story, which describes the fight
between Marduk and the dragon
Tiamat or Tiamtu (‘the deep,’ like
Hebr. £'4dm2), the personification of
disorder, who dwelt in the sea.
Indeed, the Book of Job, so full of
allusions to mythology, also fur-
nishes a parallel ; we read in xxvi

12, 13,—

By his power he hath stirred up the sea,

And by his skill he hath smitten Rahab ;
By his breath the heavens become serene,
His hand hath pierced through the flying

serpent.

Rahab in the second line is synony-
mous with the cloud- or storm-
dragon :—this is certain both from
its being placed parallel with ‘the
flying serpent’ (flying, that is, from
the sun or from the lightning) in
line 4, and from Isa. li. 9 (see note),
It is hardly less certain that ‘the
sea’ in the first line is the upper

1 La Magie chez les Chaldéens (1874), p. 151; comp. Sayce's ed. of Smith's
Chaldean Genesis (1880), pp. 86-7, where the same lyric monologue of Marduk is
translated. Among its lines are the following :—

The sun of fifty faces, the lofty weapon of my divinity, I bear...

Like the serpent which beats the sea, (which attacks) the foe in the face,

CHAP. XXVIL]. ISAIAH. 159

the leviathan the wreathed serpent, and he shall slay the
dragon in the sea, ?In that day—‘*the pleasant vineyard *
—sing ye of it. *I Jehovah am its keeper; moment by
moment I water it; lest any should invade it, by night and
by day I keep it, *® Wrath have I none”; might I but have

® So Sept., Targ. (?), some Hebr. MSS., Lowth, Ew., Del., Naeg.—TExtT, The

vineyard of foaming wine.

b I have no wall [speech of the vineyard], Sept., Pesh., Lowth, Gritz.

ocean in its dark, cloudy reservoir
(Job ix. 8, Ps. xxxili. 7, comp. Job
xxvi. 8), above which Jehovah sit-
teth (Ps. civ. 3) ; otherwise the first
line will be inconsistent with the
rest (comp. also Ps. lxxxix. 9, 10).
So here in Isa. xxvii. The two
leviathans, or ‘coilers, and the
dragon, are slightly varying mythic
expressions for the storm- and rain-
cloud, the enemy of the sun and
of light. And the prophet means
to say that just as Jehovah is su-
preme in the physical heaven, and
keeps the sky-dragon, that is, the
ungenial, cloudy darkness, within
bounds, so He is supreme in the
moral heaven, and prevents ‘ the
prince of the power of the air’—
the personification of evil and dis-
order— from exceeding his per-
mitted functions (Job i. 12).! Per-
haps, too, he means to say that
there is a connection between these
physical, or physico-moral, and
moral spheres of rebellion, just as
in xxiv. 21 the Divine visitation is
held upon the host of the heavenly
patronisers and the host of the
earthly patronised. — Most critics
think that three particular kingdoms
are referred to under these sym-
bolic phrases—Assyria, Babylon,
and Egypt, or Egypt, Assyria, and
Tyre, or Media, Persia, and Egypt.
It is true, the dragon is elsewhere an
emblem of Egypt, li. 9, Ezek, xxix.
3, xxxii. 2, Ps. Ixxiv. 13 (‘the dra-
gons’); but so also, close to one of
these passages, is the leviathan (Ps,
Ixxiv. 13, 14). If anyone chooses,
therefore, to say that all three
phrases mean Egypt, he cannot be

refuted ; and yet I think it is safer,
considering xxiv. 21, not to limit
the number of the hostile kingdoms
to one or even to three. The num-
ber is perhaps chosen to correspond
to the triple description of the
sword of Jehovah at the beginning
of the verse.—Hard] i.e., well-
tempered (‘cruel,’ as Gen. xlix. 7,
suits the context less).

? Here the bright side of the judg-
ment begins :—Israel is received
back into favour. Prophecy passes
into song. Possibly the words
‘shall this song be sung’ have
fallen out, and yet it may be urged
that the abbreviation of the open-
ing formula is in keeping with the
rush of the song. This abruptness
of style makes the work of exposi-
tion very difficult. The first verse
of the song, no doubt, is clear. Je-
hovah is the speaker ; he declares
that he will in person be the guar-
dian of his vineyard (cf. on i. 8).
But v. 4, at any rate the first clause
of it, seems very loosely connected;
indeed, it evidently introduces a
new cycle of ideas, Then again
the second and following clauses
seem hardly consistent with the
first :—no wrath, and yet a hostile
aggression on the part of Jehovah!
Then, in v. 5, protection and peace
are offered to certain persons, ap-
parently to the same who are indi-
cated by the phrase ‘briars and
thorns.’ And yet elsewhere ‘ thorns’
are the symbols of an obstinacy
destined for destruction (comp. x.
17, xxxili, 12, 2 Sam, xxiii, 6, 7,
Nah. i. 10). Lowth evades the
difficulty by rendering in v, 1 ‘sing

1 Mr. Budge remarks that perhaps a similar spiritual meaning was conveyed by
the Babylonian tablet to those who read it, ‘Tiamat representing wickedness or dark-
ness, and Marduk light and righteousness’ (Proceedings of S. B. A., 1883, p. 6).

160

ISATAH.

[CHAP. XXVII.

briars and thorns before me! with war would I stride against
them, I would burn them up together; ?else he must ‘take

asylum in me° (and) “make peace with me.’4

6 Tn (days) to

come Jacob shall take root, Israel shall blossom and bud, and
they shall fill the face of the world with fruit.
7 Hath He smitten him as He smote his smiter ? or was

he slain as his *slayers were slain?

¢ Lit., take hold of my asylum ; or, my defence, Ges., Ew., &c,

«4 Texr repeats these words.

8fIn exact measure *,

See on xxx, 2.

© So Sept., Pesh., Lowth, Ew.—Slain ones. © Hebr. points.
f So Ges., Del., Naeg., Kay.—By driving her away, Hitz., Ew.

ye aresponsive song’ (comp. Ex.
xv. 21: same verb apparently, but
different conjugation) ; reading
‘wall’ instead of ‘wrath’ in v. 4,
and distributing the song anti-
phonally—an attractive theory, but
not entirely consistent with the
present text. Drechsler regards
the song as the counterpart of the
song and oracle in v. 1-7. ‘ There
the Lord pronounced a judgment
of rejection upon Israel, using the
figure of the vineyard; in our
passage he declares that he receives
his people back, and takes the
parable of the vineyard for his
theme.’ This view seems to me
correct; it enables us to give a
reasonable exegesis, though it does
not entirely remove the suspicion
that the present text may contain
some errors. ‘Wrath have I
none] i.c., 1 have no longer any
wrath towards it. Briars and
thorns] i.e.,thosereferred to in v. 6,
only that what is there an unex-
plained detail of the parable has
here become a speaking figure for
the hostile peoples, which, like
parasitical plants, have overrun
God’s heritage. There is therefore
a combined reference to v. 6 and
a

5 or else... . ] A truly evan-
gelical belief that God is willing to
be reconciled even to His enemies.
Its presence here gives the pro-
phecy a spiritual superiority over
the other prophetic descriptions
of the judgment upon the hostile
nations, e.g., xvi. 16, Even accord-
ing to xix, 22 Egypt must be first

smitten in order that it may be
healed. ‘Take asylum in me]
Let him take sanctuary in the Name
of Jehovah, which is ‘a strong
tower ; the righteous runneth into
it and is safe’ (Prov. xviii. 10); in
short, let him become a believing
servant of Jehovah, ‘Fortress’ in
alt. rend. would be a symbolical
name for a protecting deity, as
xvii. 10, Ps. lit. 7 (9).

® Israel likened to a colossal
tree, ‘the leaves of which are for the
healing of the nations’ (Rev. xxii.
2), 1.e., the blessing of salvation
(yeshii‘ah) shall extend to the whole
world (the ‘new earth’?). Partly
parallel, xxxvii. 31, Hos. xiv. 6.

7,8 The prophet returns to the
point of view adopted at xxvi. 8.
He reminds his people of the
moderation with which Jehovah has
treated them. Their punishment,
however painful, was not so severe
as that of their enemies. His
smiter] Comp. x. 20,——His
slayers] No critic can be surprised
at the misplacing of a Vav. The
received reading is most obscure.
It ought to mean the slain Israel-
ites, but this is clearly against the
context ; so the commentators per-
force explain it of the enemies of
the theocracy, slain either by Je-
hovah (Del.) or by Israel (Knob.,
Naeg., &c.).

8 in exact measure] ‘ Dealing
out punishment incarefully adjusted
quantities’ (Kay), Lit., ‘in a seah,
a seah’; a seah is 4 of an ephah
(see on v. 10), and therefore a very
small measure. A singular phrase-

CHAP. XXVIL]

ISAIAH. 161

when dismissing her, thou didst contend with her ; he scared
her away with his rough blast in the day of the east wind.
® Therefore 8 on these terms & shall the guilt of Jacob be purged,
and this shall be all the fruit of taking away his sin, when he
maketh all the altar-stones like lime-stones dashed in pieces,
that Ashérahs and sun-images rise up no more. 1 For the
fortified city » shall be ® solitary, a homestead dismissed and
deserted as the wilderness ; there shall the calf feed, and there

lie down, and browse upon the branches thereof. '! When its
& So Riehm.—Hereby, Ges., Ew., Del. &c. ® Or, is.
and perhaps corrupt ; comp. forthe ——That Ashérahs... The

form of the Hebr., Zav-kav, xviii. 2.
Alt. rend. seems to me now pre-
carious ; see, however, Vodes and
‘Criticism, p. 29. In the day of
the east wind] A figure for a
national catastrophe, the east (more
strictly, south-east) wind being spe-
cially violent and destructive, comp.
Job xxvii. 21, Ps. xlviii, 7, and
especially Hos. xiii. 15.

® An inference from the Divine
moderation. Jehovah has only ban-
ished, not destroyed, his people,
consequently repentance is still
possible, and Jehovah will merci-
fully accept this repentance as an
atonement for guilt. On these
terms] viz., of destroying the em-
blems of idolatry. Rend. as in
Gen. xxxiv. 15, 22, 1 Sam. xi. 2.!
Alt. rend. seems hardly in accord-
ance with prophetic theology (see
on xxii. 14), at least if ‘hereby’
means ‘by undergoing his punish-
ment of captivity.’ The next clause
is difficult : we should expect, ‘ And
the putting away of his sin is en-
tirely the fruit of this.” But there
is a meaning in this violation of
the parallelism. In one sense (i.e.,
from a human point of view) Israel’s
repentance was the cause; in an-
other (ie., from a divine point of
view) it was the result, of his for-
giveness. Justice and mercy are
combined in the removal of guilt,
according to the Old Test. as well
as the New. Obs., too, that ‘ guilt’
and ‘sin’ are parallel, as in v. 18.

mention of the symbols of Ashérah
(see on xvii. 8) is not what we
should expect from a writer living
during the Babylonian exile. The
phenomenon is, of course, not
decisive of the critical question at
issue, but ought to have its due
weight.

10 Very different meantime shall
be the fate of the world’s metro-
polis. Its fortifications shall be
razed; its population ‘dismissed’
(into exile or to Shedl); its only
visitors pasturing flocks, and women
in search of wood. Calv., Ges.,
Del., Knob. think the fortified
city is Jerusalem, but surely the
context is against this view. It is
true that the Jews are said to be
without knowledge in i. 3, and that
Jehovah is their ‘former’ (xliii. 1),
but the same things are said of the
heathen (xliv. 17, Ps. Ixxxvi. 9).
The irremediableness of the ruin,
expressed analogically by the ‘un-
mercifulness’ of Jehovah, certainly
suits a great heathen city better
than Jerusalem :—Jon. iv. 11 stands
unique in the Old Test. Dis-
missed] i.e., deprived of its in-
habitants.

1 xts twigs] ie., those of the
bushes which will grow up wild on
the site of the now levelled city
(comp. vii.25). A striking contrast
to the parks and gardens which
an Oriental city enclosed within
its limits.—For the suppression of
the noun of the genitive, comp. v. 14.

1 Riehm, Der Begriff der Siihne im A. T. pp. 12 13, note 2,

VOL. I.

M

162 ISAIAH, [cHap. XxvIIl,

twigs are dry, thcy shall be broken off; women shall come
and set them on a blaze: for it is not a people of under-
standing; therefore he who made it hath no compassion
upon it, and he who formed it sheweth it no favour. 1! And
it shall come to pass in that day, that Jehovah shall beat out
i(corn) from the * swelling stream * of the River unto the torrent
of Egypt, and ye shall be gathered one by one, ye children of
Israel. ' And it shall come to pass in that day that a great
trumpet shall be blown ; and those shall come who were lost
in the land of Assyria, and outcasts in the land of Egypt,
and shall worship Jehovah, in the holy mountain, in Jeru-
salem.

i Or, fruit, Hitz., Ges.

12,183 A concluding prophecy of
comfort. Here again there are
great difficulties of interpretation.
The point of view assumed in the
rest of the chapter is in the midst
of a period of exile—as most
critics believe, the Babylonian
exile. But the point of view in
these two verses is that of Isaiah,
in whose time Assyria and Egypt
were Israel’s principal foes, and
who distinctly anticipates that
when Jehovah interposes ‘the
second time’ his people will be dis-
persed chiefly in Assyria and Egypt.
I venture to hold confidently that
these verses must be explained en-

& Or, ear (of corn).

(There may be a double meaning),

tirely on the analogy of xi. 11-16.—
Ges. however thinks that the Eu-
phrates and the Wady el-‘Arish are
here the extreme boundaries of the
promised land of Israel (Gen. xv.
18, 1 Kings vill. 65), and that the
passage means that Jehovah will
people the kingdom in its fullest
extent as rapidly and numerously
as berries fall from the olive-trees.
Beat out] As a more careful
plan than threshing (comp. Judg. vi.
11, Ruth ii. 17). —— A great trum-
pet] The same signal for a Divine
interposition as in xviii. 3, comp. xi.
12, Matt. xxiv. 31. Outcasts]
Same phrase as in xi, 12,

CHAPTER XXVIII.

A GLANCE at the sad fate of Samaria, followed by an invective against
the frivolity, perversity, and superstition of the ruling classes of Judah,
and closed by a persuasive parable. The chapter divides naturally at
v. 14 and v. 23. It must be taken in connection with the four, if not five,
following chapters, which were probably circulated together among the
disciples and adherents of Isaiah as a separate work. It is true, they
have no heading, but their Isaianic origin and—in spite of some slight
differences in the chronological data—their close connection (especially
that of xxix.-xxxii.) cannot for a moment be called in question. They
were evidently delivered at various stages of the Assyrian intervention
under Sargon (see on chaps. x. 5, &c., and xx.).

‘The most noteworthy feature of this important group of discourses
is the wise distinction everywhere made between the various classes of

CHAP. XXxvuIL.] ISAIAII. 163

opponents. Isaiah well knew that the mass of the people erred rather
from weakness and fear than intentionally, and that only individual
defiantly rash ‘princes’ had so miserably gone astray in their aims and
calculations. He therefore varies his tone and manner, according as he
addresses the leaders of the nation or the people themselves. In the first
case, the Divine words come from his mouth with a crushing force ; in
the second, they are full of gentle seriousness and hope’ (Ewald). This
variety of tone is specially exhibited in chap. xxviii.

1 Woe to the proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim,
and the fading flower of his glittering bravery, which is on
the head of the fat valley of those who are smitten down by
wine. ? Behold, a strong and unflinching one hath * Jehovah ;
like a storm of hail (and) a tempest of destruction, like a
storm of mighty, overflowing waters, he shall cast it to the
ground with force. * With the feet shall it be trampled upon
--the proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim ; ‘and the
fading flower of his glittering bravery, which is on the head
of the fat valley, shall become as an early fig before the fruit-
harvest, which whoso seeth, while it is yet in his hand he
swalloweth it. ®In that day shall Jehovah Sabdoth be for a

® So many MSS, ; TEXT, the Lord.

1 Isaiah opens with a woe upon

olives’ (Strachey). The luxury of
Samaria. He has before now said

(viii. 6, comp. Mic. i. 6, &c.) that the
storm of judgment must first break
upon Samaria, and then upon Jeru-
salem—not merely for geographical
reasons, but because the spiritual
condition of both cities is similar.
He mentions drunkenness, not as
the root of the national evil, but
rather as its flower. The appalling
thing is that when all is on the
point of collapsing, those respon-
sible for the state should be given
up to self-indulgence. Comp. Hos.
vii. § and Am. iv. 1 (Samaria), Am.
vi. 4-6 (Zion and Samaria). The
proud crown .. . | ‘ Isaiah fuses
into one image the heads of the
nation, crowned with flowers at
their habitual debauches, and the
capital cities—Samaria and Jerusa-
lem(?)'—each reposing in its fertile
valley, and crowned with a chaplet
of towers intertwined with vines and

Samaria reflects itself in the tribute
of Jehu to Shalmaneser, which in-
cludes bowls, cups, bottles, and
vessels of gold (Smith, Assyrian
Canon, p. 114). Smitten down
by wine] Comp. on xvi. 8,

? unflinching] An uncommon
word; again in xl. 26.——#fath
Jehovah] As his prepared instru-
ment. So ‘Jehovah hath a day,’
ii. 12, xxii, 5.——Destruction]
Word only found here and in Deut.
xxxii. 24, Ps. xci. 6. Force] Lit.,
hand ; comp. Ex. xiv. 31. So Assy-
rian zdu ( =Hebr. ya), constantly,
both of gods and of men (Norris’s
Assyrian Dict. i. 209).

¢ An early fig] A special deli-
cacy ; comp. Hos. 1x. 10, Mic. vii. 1,
Nah. iii. 12, Jer. xxiv. z.

5 When this great act in the
drama of judgment is over, there
will be an incipient fulfilment of the
Messianic promise——Unto the

1 Surely not Jerusalem, which is nowhere described as situated ina valley. See

on xxii. 5.

M2

164 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXVIIL

glittering crown, and for a brave diadem unto the remnant of
his people, ®and for a spirit of judgment to him who sitteth
on the judgment-seat, and for valour to those who turn back
war to the gate. 7 But even these reel with wine and stagger
with strong drink ; priest and prophet reel with strong drink,
they are swallowed up through wine, they stagger with strong
drink ; they reel in the vision, they totter in judgment. § For
all tables are full of filthy vomit, so that no place is left.
9 Whom would he teach knowledge, and whom would he make
to understand the Tidings? Those who are weaned from the
milk, and separated from the breasts ? '° For (it is) ‘command

remnant of his people] The
meaning is not very clear. Does
‘his people’ include Judah as well
as Israel, or only Israel? The
analogy of viii. 6 makes it probable
that the former view is correct,
though the promise is doubtless
inserted here out of fairness to
Ephraim, which still had its stand-
ing-ground in Jehovah’s covenant.
But we must evidently supplement
the promise from x. 21. It is a
converted ‘remnant’ of which the
prophet speaks.

® Civil justice is still (as in chap.
xi.) the most prominent feature of
the Messianic period as it mirrors
itself in the mind of the prophet.
Jehovah, he says, shall inspire the
judges with a spirit of judgment.
He specially refers to the priests,
see v. 7, and comp. Deut. xvii. 8-
12, Ex. xxi, 22, 2 Chr. xix. 5-8.
Judgment-seat] Same mean-
ing of mzshpatin xli. 1, comp. Job
ix. 32, XXiL 4. To the gate]
i.e., probably, to the gate of the
city from which the enemies came ;
comp. 2 Sam. xi. 23.

7 Here the prophet seems to be
summing up a fresh cycle of pro-
phecies.—A scene worthy of Sama-
ria is being enacted in Jerusalem
(comp. Am. vi. 1-7, Mic. ii. 11).
Priests and prophets come visibly
drunk (from the sacrificial feasts?
see on xxv. 6) to their most solemn
functions of judgment (see above)
and prophecy. Isaiah refers of
course to the lower order of pro-

phets, who had no revelations of
spiritual truth like himself.

® 10 The drunkards mocking
Isaiah over their cups. Does he
not know what respectable persons
he is dealing with, not like children
who need leading strings, but edu-
cated priests and prophets? They
have caught up from Isaiah one of
his favourite words (probably), and
repeat it with a sneer—viz., Ti-
dings, i.e., revelation, that which
the prophet has ‘ heard from Jeho-
vah’ v. 22, comp. xxi. 10). The
word occurs again in this sense in
v. 19, lili. 1, Ob. 1. It is from these
passages that dxon gets its peculiar
meaning in Rom. x. 16, 17. Know-
ledge is also a term for the pro-
phetic preaching, i. 3, xxxiii. 6. [I
am not sure that the above inter-
pretation (Ew., Del., Naeg.) is cor-
rect ; it is at any rate possible and
worthy. Others take ‘ weaned from
the milk’ as an allegory either of
simplicity of faith (Kay) or of the
very opposite of this (Weir), omit-
ting of course the interrogation.]
——For (it is) command upon
command... He is always
interfering with his moral and (see
v. 12) political recommendations ;
always finding some ‘little’ point
to censure and correct. Comp. the
word used by Micah’s opponents,
‘Do not go on dropping,’ an old
phrase for prophesying with a new
unfavourable implication (Mic. ii.
6). The monosyllabic forms in the
Hebr. (gav la-cav gav la-gav) re-

CHAP. XXVIII] ISAIAH.

165
upon command, command upon command, rule upon rule,
rule upon rule, a little here, a little there.” ' Yea, with
stammerings of lip and with another tongue shall he speak
unto this people ; '* because he said unto them, This is the
rest, give ye rest to the weary ; and this is the refreshment,
but they would not hear. '? But the word of Jehovah shall
be unto them ‘command upon command, command upon
command, rule upon rule, rule upon rule, a little here, a little
there,’ that they may go away, and stumble backward, and be

‘broken, and be snared, and taken.
4 Therefore hear the word of Jehovah, ye men of scorn,

rulers of this people which is in Jerusalem.

present at once the stammer of a
drunkard, and the monotonous cha-
racter attributed to Isaiah’s teach-
ing.

i The prophet retorts their own
language upon them. Yes; it shall
be in fact as you say. This childish
monotone shall indeed sound in
your ears, The description which
you give of the revelations of Je-
hovah shall be exactly applicable to
the harsh, laconic commands of a
merciless invader. For Assyrian,
although closely allied to Hebrew,
was sufficiently different from it
both in grammar and in vocabulary
to seem a ‘stammering’ or ‘bar-
barous’ tongue to Isaiah’s contem-
poraries. The common diplomatic
and commercial language of Syria
and Assyria was Aramaic (see xxxvi.
I1).——Shall he speak] The As-
syrians being God’s instruments.
So xxix. 3: ‘/ will lay siege against
thee’ This is the rest] 1.e.,
the true rest. Isaiah practically
grants the monotony, or rather uni-
formity, of his preaching. But there
was but one remedy for the evils
of the time. ‘Through returning
and rest shall ye be saved’ (xxx.
15). It was the ‘rest,’ not of pas-
sive obedience to Assyria, but of
hearty faith in Jehovah, which he
recommended, Comp. Mic. ii. 10,
Jer. vi. 16.

4-22 Jehovah pronounces judg-
ment. He addresses — not the
king, who is passed over in silence

15 Because ye

in most of the Hezekian discourses
of Isaiah (comp. on vii. 2)—but
the ‘rulers,’ the politicians. These
are designated men of scorn (comp.
vy. 22, and xxix. 20). The title
‘scorners’ seems to be given in
Proverbs to those who opposed
or despised the counsels of the
‘wise men, and broke through
the restraints of law and religion
(comp. Prov. xv. 12, xxi. 24).
Mere politicians were ‘scorners’
to Isaiah and Hosea (vii. 5).—
The divine oracle has two aspects,
like that addressed upon a similar
occasion to Ahaz:—it holds forth at
once a curse and a blessing. The
ruling classes at Jerusalem had se-
cured themselves, as they thought,
by an Egyptian alliance (only, it is
true, in its first stage as yet) against
any damage to themselves from an
Assyrian invasion. <A policy of
‘lying, which would avenge itself
upon its authors! Only those who
trusted in Zion’s ‘foundation-stone’
would hold their ground. The vacil-
lation of the politicians has excited
Isaiah’s indignation. First, they
have acted a ‘ lie’ against Jehovah
by calling in Assyria (2 Kings xvi.
7) ; next they shift their confidence
from Assyria to Egypt (comp. Jer.
ii. 17-19).

18 A covenant with death] Not
=‘an alliance with the fatal power
of the Assyrians’ (R. Smith, Zhe
Prophets of Israel, p. 284). Isaiah
adopts ‘a kind of proverbial express

166

ISATAH.

[CHAP. XXVIII

have said, We have entered into a covenant with Death,
and with Shed] have we made an agreement; the flooding
scourge, when it passeth along, shall not come unto us, for we
have set lies for our refuge, and in falsehood have we hid
ourselves :—'* Therefore, thus saith Jehovah, Behold, I ® will
found” in Zion a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner-stone
of solid foundation ; he that hath faith shall not ° give way.
‘And I will set justice for a line,and righteousness for a
plummet, and hail shall sweep off the refuge of lies, and the

> So Sept., Koppe, Weir.—Am he that hath founded. Hebr. points.

© Make haste. Hebr. text.
sion to denote perfect security from
evil and mischief of any sort.
Job v. 23, Hos. ii. 18, Lucan ix.
894 (of the Psylli: Pax illis cum
morte data est). Lowth.—Obs., the
*scorners’ or free-thinkers have re-
tained a strong belief in the infernal
powers, Death and Shedl (see on
xxxvill, 18), though little enough in
those supernal. The flooding
scourge] A mixture of metaphors.
‘Scourge, as in x. 26; ‘flooding,’
with a sceptical reference to the
prophecy of the ‘overflowing wa-
ters,’ which shall ‘sweep along into
Judah’ (viii. 7, 8), or to similar
prophecies.

16 Behold, I will found in Zion
a stone] (See crit. note). To un-
derstand the form of this prophecy,
we must recollect the enormous
size and cost of the foundation-
stones of Eastern public buildings:
—comp. Job xxxvili. 6 ‘who cast
(as a trifling burden) the earth’s
foundation-stone, 1 Kings v. 17
‘ great stones, costly stones, hewed
stones, to lay the foundation of the
house.’ But what is this ‘stone’?
Isaiah cannot mean to connect the
peace and security of Zion (or of
the pious Israel) with a material
stone. He has told us elsewhere
that Jehovah is, on the one hand,
‘the Rock of Israel’ (xxx. 29); on
the other, ‘a stone to fall against’
to many nominal Israelites. Jeho-
vah then must be meant here.
There may, indeed, be an allusion
to the old popular superstition
which attached a peculiar sanctity

to sacred stones (e.g., at Delphi
and Troy), but if so, Isaiah only
alludes to it to discountenance it.
It is not said ‘he who believeth on
the stone shall not give way,’ but
simply ‘he who believeth’ :—now
the object of absolute faith can be
but one, Jehovah. But the foun-
dation-stone of the temple in the
solid rock of Zion (from which the
mosque called Kubbet es-sakhra,
or ‘the dome of the rock,’ derives
its name) might well be regarded
as a type of the unchangeableness
of that temple’s God. This view
is confirmed by the peculiar intro-
ductory form of expression, ‘I will
found zz Zion ;’ it is the manifes-
tation of the Divine faithfulness
towards believers which is meant.
Jehovah will in Zion verify his
revealed character. The security of
believers will justify their faith, even
as the permanence of the temple-
building verifies the solidity of the
foundation (comp. especially xiv.
32). There is perhaps an allusion
in Ps. cxviii. 22.—— Shall not give
way] The text-reading does not
suit the connection. Sept., Targ.,
Pesh., feeling that something was
wrong, render freely ‘shall not be
put to shame’ (see crit. note).

1719 In contrast to Zion’s zm0-
bile saxum, all other subjects of
confidence shall be swept away.
For trampling upon] So
again of the Assyrian invasion,
x. 6.—— Take you away] The
image is that of a flood, which
carries off more and more human

CHAP. XXVIIL.] ISAIAH. 167

hiding-place 4of falsehood ¢ shall waters flood away ; '8and
your covenant with Death shall be * annulled, and your agree-
ment with Shed! shall not stand: the flooding scourge, when
it passeth along—ye shall be unto it for trampling upon; as
often as it passeth along, it shall take you away, for morning
by morning shall it pass along, by day and by night; and it
shall be simply a terror to understand the Tidings. *°[* For
too short is the bed for one to stretch himself out at length,
and too narrow the covering when one wrappeth himself in it.?]
21 For Jehovah shall arise as on mount Perazim, he shall be
stirred as in the valley of Gibeon ; todo his work—alien is his
work, and to carry out his task —strange is his task. *? And
now—behave not as scorners, lest your bonds become fixed,
for final and decisive is that which I have heard (coming)
from the Lord, Jehovah Sabdoth, over all the land.

3 Give ye ear, and hear my voice ; attend ye, and hear
my speech, Is a ploughman continually ploughing in
order to sow; (or) opening and harrowing his ground?
2% When he hath levelled the surface thereof, doth he not

4 These words, which are necessary to complete the sense, are wanting in text and

versions,

© So Targ., Secker, Lo., Houb., Hupf., Weir, Wellh.; TEXT, cancelled (see crit,

not

victims at each time of its appear-
ance. Repeated Assyrian invasions.
—fTo understand the Tidings]
Aclear reference to v. 9. Men shall
then understand but too well the
‘ Tidings’ which they once scorned.
Or, perhaps, on the analogy of
v. 13 ; As they refused a spoken re-
velation, they shall be compelled to
understand the preaching of facts.

0 For ... | Perhaps a prover-
bial expression for a state of pain-
ful uneasiness. The view that it
is an interpolation is confirmed by
the presence of an Aramaism.

21 Perazim ...Gibeon] Scenes
of David’s victories over the Phi-
listines ; see 2 Sam. v. 20 (‘ Baal of
Perazim,’ because the hill was sur-
mounted by a sanctuary of Baal),
25 (Geba), 1 Chr. xiv. 16 (Gibeon).
Ew. however denies this reference,
and thinks, rather, of the events of
Josh. x. 10 (the natural phenomena

e).
f (Of doubtful genuineness, Kuenen and others).

suit our prophecy, comp. vv. 2, 17).
But both may be combined.—
Alien is his work] ‘Alien, such
as might be understood if worked
upon foreigners, but not upon Je-
hovah’s ‘ peculiar’ people. See on
i. 7, and comp. Job xxxi. 3, A. V. ‘a
strange punishment to the workers
of iniquity’ (see Hebr.); also Jer.
ii. 14. ‘His work, i-e., his work of
judgment, as x. 12, Ps. lxiv. 9, Hab.
i. 5.
2 Again an appeal to the politi-
cians, who are ambitious of break-
ing the bonds of the Assyrian yoke
(x. 27, Nah. i. 13), and who scorn
the prophet of ill-tidings. But this
is only the way to fix their bonds,
and, even worse than this, to invite
certain destruction.—The closing
words recur in x. 23, suggesting the
nearly contemporaneous origin of
both prophecies.

73 A turn takes place in the dis-

168

ISATAH.

(CHAP. XXVIII

scatter fenncl-flower, and cast abroad cummin, and plant
wheat and £ barley, and £ vetches as the border thereof. *And
"he correcteth each* as is fitting, his God instructing him.
*7 For fennel-flower is not threshed with a sledge, nor is a
cart-wheel rolled over the cummin, but fennel-flower is beaten

out with a staff, and cummin with a rod.

crushed to pieces?

8iTs bread-corn

Nay, not for ever is he threshing it, or

driving his cart-wheel and his horses (over it) ; he doth not

& Text repeats this word in a corrupt form, Wellhausen (see crit. note).
b (God) traineth him, Vulg., A.E., Kimchi, Ges., Ew., Del.
! Bread-corn is threshed, but, Ew. (another read.)

course. The style is gnomic—that
of the so-called Khokma or ‘ wis-
dom’-literature ; obs. especially the
word rendered ‘wisdom,’ which
occurs ten times in the ethical
books of Proverbs and Job. Comp.
xxii. 6-8, which is also in the
gnomic style, and xxix. 24 (see note).
The inference is that the literary
style of the prophet was influenced
by that of his less purely religious
fellow-teachers, the ‘wise men.’—
The parable which follows admits of
more than one interpretation. We
may suppose (a) that its object is to
comfort believers. The operations
of ploughing and threshing are a
silent sermon, teaching those who
have the inner ear the meaning of
Israel’s ¢rzbulations. The delicate
fennel-flower is not threshed, neither
does Jehovah thresh his people ; or
if some wise purpose leads him now
and then to do so, he does not
crush them to pieces, his object
being to purify, and not to destroy.
(So Drechsler, Del., Naeg.)—Or
(4) with Ewald, we may view it as
a final appeal to the politicians.
‘The husbandman does nothing
without regard to its proper manner
and measure. Ye magnates and
philosophers, who imagine your-
selves to be far more than a
husbandman, will ye observe no
moderation and propriety? will ye
go on in your wild, irrational life?’
It would be fatal to agriculture to
desert its sacred traditions (see on
v. 26); and equally fatal will it be
to you to scorn the constantly
proffered advice of Jehovah’s pro-

phet. Even the politician cannot
disregard religious sanctions and
traditions. If we adopt (a), we
must suppose the notes of a fresh
prophecy to have been tacked on
to the foregoing ; if (4), we havea
justification which has till now been
withheld of the ‘rule upon rule’
complained of by the ‘scorners.’
I now prefer the latter, with
Robertson Smith and Wellhausen.
—On the agricultural allusions in
this section see Mr. Houghton’s
papers on the botany of the Bible
in the Brble Educator. In the ren-
dering vetches, I follow Wetzstein
ap. Del. ed. 2, p. 705. Apparently
a kind of vetch was planted round
the fields of grain as a protecting
border—obviously a much more
suitable border than one of spelt,
the most delicate of the cereals.
According to Wetzstein, the
ricinus is still cultivated with this
object.

26 and he correcteth each ...]
Not only the soil, but the seed, is
in a certain sense ‘chastised’ or
‘corrected? regard being had in
each case to the character of the
seed. Comp. Jer. xxx. 11, xlvi. 28,
where the same phrase occurs.
Del.’s rend. seems less natural and
forcible, though it has the support
of the older interpreters. In-
structing him] From Jehovah
proceed the unwritten laws alike of
social custom and of agricultural
operations. The Eastern peasant
never dreams of improving his
methods ; he accepts the wisdom
of remote ancestors as a divine ap-

CHAP. XXIX.] ISAJAH. 169

crush it to pieces. * This also proceedeth from Jehovah
Sabdoth ; wonderful counsel hath he, great wisdom.

pointment. One may without ir-
reverence compare the mythic re-
velations of Osiris and Oannes.!

2” This also... ] viz. hus-
bandry, which, like the despised

prophesying of Isaiah, is an ap-
pointment of that manifold wisdom
which will swallow up the puny
wisdom of the scoffers (xxix. 14).
Comp. ‘ Wonder-Counsellor,’ ix. 6.

CHAPTER XXIX.

A SUMMARY of two discourses. Vy. 1-12 contain the riddle of Ariel
and its explanation ; vv. 13-24 a prediction of a sweeping judgment
on the untheocratically-minded members of the church-nation. In the
latter part (v. 15) we meet with the first allusion to the negotiations
with Egypt, which are more distinctly denounced in chaps. xxx. xxxi.
The politicans as well as the prophet are awake to the pressing dan-
ger from Assyria, but the efforts of the former being but worldly-wise
will utterly fail. Within a year, says the prophet, ‘Ariel’ will be re-
duced to extremities. In xxxii. 9-20 the interval allowed is slightly
longer.—Isaiah implies that his unsusceptible hearers did not well under-
stand his language; no wonder, then, if we find it difficult, even in the

light of a sympathetic and comparative study of his works.

! Alas for Ariel, Ariel, city where David encamped!

1 alas for] ‘Wo to’ (A.V.) does
not suit the context, which is one
of promise as well as of threatening.
Ariel] One of Isaiah’s favour-
ite symbolic names (comp. Rahab,
Valley of Vision, &c.), and signify-
ing either God’s hearth or altar, or
more probably (see crit. note) God’s
Lion (Ewald, ‘Lioness’); comp. Gen.
xlix. 9, Ezek. xix. 2, 3. From one
point of view, Jehovah is Jerusa-
lem’s Lion (xxxi. 4); from another,
Jerusalem is Jehovah’s Lion. Why
not, then, Arijah (Lion of Jehovah)?
Probably because the form Ariel
was already in use (xxxiii. 7, 2 Sam.
xxiii, 20, comp. Gen. xlvi. 16, Num.
xxvi. 17). Parallels for this sym-
bolic name of Jerusalem abound in

Add

the Assyrian inscriptions. Thus
in the Monolith Inscription of
Shalmaneser we find ‘the city of
Nappigi’ endowed with the second
name, ‘The Law of Assur,’ and
‘the city of Ruguliti’ also called
‘The Command (of Assur)’; 2. P.,
iil. 92. So too at Babylon the two
great walls were called respectively
lImgur-Bel or ‘Bel is_ gracious,’
and Nimitti-Bel, or ‘ Foundation
of Bel’ (Delitzsch, Wo lag das
Paradies? p. 215). Comp. also
Isa. xix. 18 if ‘City of the Sun’ be
the right reading ——Encamped]
i.e., not in a hostile sense, as Sir
E. Strachey, following Sept. and
Vulg., but =dwelt (comp. ‘To your
tents, O Israel!’), perhaps with

1 The true interpretation has been best given by Robertson Smith (Zhe Prophets
of Israel, pp. 285-7), following Wellhausen (Gesch. Israels, ed. 2, np. 417 8).
2 Hitzig finds an allusion to the physical resemblance of the mountain-city to a

lion in repose (Gesch. des Volkes Israel, p. 32), Ewald, to the lion's being the ensign
(might we say the totem? see on xv. 6) of the tribe of Judah (comp. Gen. xlix. 9,
Ezek, xix. 2); Aés/ory, iii. 250.

170 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXIX.

year to year, let the feasts run their round; ?then will I
straiten Ariel, and there shall be moaning and bemoaning,
but she shall be unto me as an Ariel. *And I will encamp
in a circle about thee, and lay siege against thee with a
“ mound, and set up siege-works against thee ; 4 and thou shalt
speak being abased from the ground, and thy speech shall
be subdued (coming) from the dust, and thy voice shall be
as that of a ghost from the ground, and from the dust thy
speech shall come chirpingly. * But the multitude of thy
enemies shall become as small dust, and as the flitting chaff
the multitude of the terrible ones, and it shall come to pass in
a moment, suddenly. 6 From Jehovah Sabdoth ° shall she be
visited > with thunder, and with earthquake, and a great noise
with whirlwind and hurricane and the flame of devouring fire ;
7and as a dream, a vision of the night, shall be the multitude
of all the nations that go to war against Ariel, even all that
go to war against her and her entrenchments, and those

that straiten her.
8 Palisade, Kay.

the added notion of ‘strength and
security’ (Dr. Weir). Add year
to year] This may mean either,
Complete one more year; or
merely, Enter upon the new year.
Probably the latter, since 1. ‘Add
ye’ implies a solemn act on the
part of the persons addressed, such,
for instance, as the celebration of
the new moon of the first month ;
and 2. the phrase can thus be har-
monised with the analogous de-
scription in a /ater passage, xxxii.
1o. [Wellhausen, Gesch. /sraels, 1.
98, supposes the interval allowed
here by the prophet before the
siege to be the same as in xxxii. Io.
This implies that xxxii. 9-20 is a
part of the same discourse as chap.
xxix., which is highly improbable,
considering the varied contents of
the intermediate prophecy].
Run their round] A cognate noun
is used for the closing of the cycle
of feasts, Ex. xxxiv. 22.

2 But she shall be... | But
in the very extremity of her need I
will enable her to verify her name,
*God’s Lion.’

8 And it shall be as when a hungry man
» A visitation shall be held, Ges., Del.

3 About thee] ‘Thee’ is femi-
nine, referring to the daughter of
Zion. ‘With a mound] This was
for the purpose of using the batter-
ing-ram, comp. Jer. xxxili. 4, and
Prof. Rawlinson’s Ancient Mon-
archies, \. 472.

4 As that of a ghost] See on
viii. 19, where the same word, ren-
dered ‘chirp,’ occurs.

5 But the multitude. ..] Dr.
Kay prefers ‘and’ to ‘but,’ on the
ground that ‘a comparison of vv.
4, 6, shows that v. 5 must still re-
late to the humiliation of Jerusa-
lem.’ The continuity of the dis-
course is at first sight in favour of
this view ; but the expression ‘thy
strangers’ (i.e, thy foes), cannot
easily be reconciled with it. The
simplicity with which v. 5 is ap-
pended to wv. 4, is, perhaps, a rhe-
torical artifice to heighten the con-
trast. Comp. the way in which vii.
17 is attached to vii. 13-16.

*,8 Twofold application of the
figure of a dream. The enemies
of Zion shall come to nothing,
like a dream ; they shall also be

CHAP. XXIX.] ISAIAH. 1I7I
dreameth, and behold! he eateth; but he waketh, and his
soul is empty ; and as when a thirsty man dreameth, and
behold! he drinketh ; but he waketh, and behold! he is faint,
and his soul craveth: so shall it be with the multitude of all
the nations which go to war against mount Zion.

9¢ Astonish yourselves,° and be astonished ; blind your-
selves,.and be blind! They are drunken, but not with wine ;
they stagger, but not with strong drink. 1° For Jehovah hath
poured out upon you a spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed
your 4eyes which see, and your ® heads hath he covered, ''so
that the vision throughout is become unto you as the words
of a sealed book which if one delivers to a man that is book-
learned, saying, Pray read this, he saith, I cannot, for it is
sealed ; and should the book be delivered to one that is

¢ Shew yourselves hesitating, Hebr. text.

d Eyes, the prophets, Hebr, text.

¢ Heads, the seers (or, the seeing), Hebr. text (see crit. note).

disappointed, as one who dreams of
eating and drinking.

® The hearers stare in astonish-
ment at a prophecy seemingly so
out of relation to facts. The pro-
phet warns them that if they wil-
fully deaden their spiritual faculties,
there will be no emerging after-
wards from this state of blindness
and stupefaction. Jehovah will judi-
cially fix them in it. Astonish
yourselves] Implying that the
state is self-caused. So Hab. i. 5
It is mainly the ruling class which
is addressed, hence the prophet
says, They are drunken, but not
with wine, alluding to xxviii. 7.

10,11 They are thus spiritually
asleep, with eyes closed, and heads
wrapped up (in Oriental fashion).
Not only the revelation in vz. 1-8,
but the whole body of Isaiah’s
prophecy, is become non-existent
to them. Their eyes that seem to
see are baffled entirely by Isaiah’s
‘vision.’ This is further illustrated
by a comparison. The educated
portion of the ruling class, having
a mere secular intelligence, is
like a man who is asked to read a
book, but is unable to ‘ loose the
seals’ (Rev. v. 2). We may fairly
infer from this passage that pro-
phecies of Isaiah were already cir-

culated in a written form. The
words inserted after ‘eyes’ and
‘heads’ in Hebr. text throw the
whole passage into confusion. The
word ‘you’ in vw 10 must mean
the same persons as ‘yourselves’
in v. 9, viz. the ruling class, in-
cluding, of course, the prophets.
Must one add that to be asleep
involves the closing of the eyes,
which cannot here be meant alle-
gorically. Still no one would ven-
ture to emend the text, were it not
for the existence of so many other
glosses, both in the Hebrew Bible
and in the Sept. Comp. especially
ix. 15.

2 and should the book... ]
A further comparison, growing out
of that in vw 11. Isaiah chiefly
attacks the ruling class, but these
only as representatives of the
people. The judgment will fall
with equal certainty on both the
ruled and the rulers. He there-
fore adds a word for the former.
Being equally devoid of secular and
spiritual intelligence (comp. Jer. v.
4), they are like a man who can
neither unseal nor read a book
(see on viii. 1). Both in form and
in contents the prophecies of Isaiah
are quite out of their reach.—It is
this verse which gives a colour of

ISAIAH. [CHaP. XXIx.

172
not book-learned, saying, Pray read this, he saith, I am not
book-learned. 'And Jehovah said, Because this people
draweth near, with their mouth and with their lips honouring
me, while their heart is far from me, and (because) their fear
of me is (nothing but) a commandment of men which hath
been taught; “therefore behold I will continue to deal
wonderfully with this people, even very wonderfully, and the
wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding
of their understanding ones shall hide itself. ' Woe unto
those who deeply hide their purpose from Jehovah, so that
their work is done in a dark place, and they say, Who seeth
us and who noticeth us? '®O your perverseness! Should
the potter be accounted as clay, that the work should say of
him that made it, He made me not? and the thing formed

say of him that formed it, He hath no understanding ?
Is it not yet a very little while, and Lebanon shall be

reason for the distribution of v. 10
among two classes of Jews. But
then this verse is an appendix, and
prepares the way for the sentence
upon ‘this people’ in vw. 13.

18-24 A summary of a fresh dis-
course. The Judahites are no-
minally worshippers of Jehovah,
but it is merely formal lip-service;
consequently Jehovah will continue
to deal wonderfully with them.
This is a very strong expression,
implying that Jehovah’s dealing
with his people is nothing short of
inconceivable (see on ix. 6), inas-
much as it seems to run counter
to his covenant-promises to Israel;
the phrase is parallel to ‘ foreign
in his work,’ &c., in xxviil. 21 (see
note). ‘Continue,’ because the in-
vasion of Rezin and Pekah had
already destroyed the illusion of
Judah’s security. command-
ment of men] Alluding to fre-
canonical collections of laws, which,
we may infer from Hos. viii. 12,
Jer. viii. 8, were current in some
circles in the times of the pre-Exile
prophets. However essential the
canonical law-book was felt to be
by the spiritual leaders of newborn
Israel, the importance of an au-
thoritative law-book was not by any

means clear to their predecessors.
Comp. on i. 11. —— Taught]
This is verbally, but not more, in-
consistent with Ps, xxxiv. II.

18 The hypocrisy of the ruling
class shows itself in their worldly-
wise but underhand policy. They
tacitly recognise the justice of
Isaiah’s claims to political as well
as spiritual direction (see on xxx.
2), and, Jike Ahaz on a similar
occasion (see on chap. vii.), seek to
throw the veil of secrecy over their
untheocratic pursuit of worldly
alliances. But Isaiah detects an
alteration in their manner. He
divines their purpose, and in figu-
rative language exposes its ‘per-
versity.’

18 Should the potter... ] A
favourite comparison with the
Biblical writers, comp. xlv. 9, Ixiv.
8 (7), Jer. xviii. 6, Sirach xxxiii. 13,
Rom. ix. 20.

17 Zs it not... ] Isaiah reminds
his hearers of what he had pro-
bably often told them—the future
material and spiritual droxaracracts,
or restitution. The connection of
ideas is more clearly traceable in
the parallel passage, xxxii. 14-19
(see notes). The result of God’s
great judgment upon Jerusalem

CHAP, XXIX.] ISAIAH.

173
turned into garden-land, and garden-land accounted a forest ?
8 And in that day the deaf shall hear the words of a book,
and out of gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind shall
see, and the humble shall obtain fresh joy in Jehovah, and
the poor among men shall exult in the Holy One of Israel.
20 For the terrible one will have come to naught, and the
scorner be gone, and all that watched for iniquity be cut
off, ‘that make people sinners * by words, and lay snares
for him that reproveth in the gate, and deprive the righteous
by a mere nothing. * Therefore thus saith Jehovah con-
cerning the house of Jacob [fhe that delivered Abraham ®]:
Jacob shall not henceforth be ashamed, neither shall his face
henceforth turn pale; *for when he seeth [*namely, his
f For a (mere) word, Vitr., Ew., Del.

& Perhaps interpolated. 4 See below.
will be a temporary withdrawal 21 That make people sin-
of His life-giving Spirit from both mers by words ... ] ie., that

land and people. But in a very
little time (to the eye of faith) there
will be a fresh outpouring of the
Spirit ; oppression will be at an
end; desolation more than reme-
died ; and the moral character of
Israel regenerated. Most com-
mentators prefer to take v. 17 figu-
ratively. But a comparison of the
parallel passage favours a combined
literal and symbolical interpreta-
tion. Isaiah’s symbols are very
seldom mere symbols (and then he
takes care to tell us so), and one
of his most characteristic ideas is
a future transformation of nature
corresponding to that of man.
Lebanon] is merely a poetical sy-
nonym for ‘ forest’; comp. x. 34. It
corresponds to ‘pasture-land’ in
xxxii. 15, both being opposed to
cultivated plantations ; comp. x. 18.

18 Here there can be no doubt
that the description is symbolic ;
see xxix. 10. The ignorant masses
shall understand ‘the words of a
book’ (he means, of a written pro-
phecy, see on vv, 10, 11), and the
self-blinded (v. 9) shall acquire
spiritual perceptions. Thus the sen-
tence in vi. 10 shall be reversed.

20 The terrible one] i.e., the foes
without (v. 5). The scorner]
ie., the foes within (xxviii. 14, 22).

effect their condemnation by false
testimony. (Compare Hos. xi. 4,
‘they have spoken words, swearing
falsely’). Thus we obtain a close
parallelism with the last clause in
the verse. Lay snares for... |
i.e., seek to compass the ruin of.
Him that reproveth in the
gate] In the chief place of con-
course, where, too, the judges sat.
So Amos, ‘They hate him that
reproveth in the gate (v. 10).
Deprive] Lit. turn aside, viz. from
the favourable verdict due to him.
Same idiom, Am. v. 12, Mal. iii. 5.
More fully, Ex. xxiii. 6, ‘Thou shalt
not turn aside the right of the weak.’
——A mere nothing] i.e.. by a
baseless aceusation.

2-24 Conclusion. Israel will in
future be spared the shame of op-
pression and captivity, for he will
have learned the lesson of the sole
divinity of Jehovah his God.
He that delivered Abraham] If
these words are genuine, they refer
to the migration of Abraham from
Mesopotamia as caused partly by
the ‘vexing of his righteous soul’
by his idolatrous kinsmen (comp.
Josh xxiv. 2, 3). There may how-
ever be an allusion to the fire out of
which, as a Talmudic legend de-
clares, explaining Ur Kasdim as

ISAIAH. (CHAP. Xxx,

174
sons] the work of my hands in his midst, they shall count
my name holy, and count holy the Holy One of Jacob, and
the God of Israel shall they count dreadful ; ** and those that
erred in spirit shall get understanding, and they that mur-
mured shall receive instruction.

‘the fire of the Chaldees,’ Abraham
was rescued. In this case, the
words must be interpolated (Well-
hausen). There is, I fear, noanalogy
for holding, with Dozy, that Abra-
ham here = Israel.—_—acob] Is it
Jacob the patriarch who is here
represented as taking a sympathetic
interest in the fortunes of his de-
scendants? This is Ewald’s opinion.
But though a similar view may per-
haps be traced elsewhere in the
Bible (see on Ixiii. 16), Jacob is
more probably a collective term for
the people of Israel; otherwise, how
are we to account for the words ‘in
his midst’?——is sons] I sus-
pect this, with Ew. (in first but not
second edition) and Knob., to be an

early gloss, intended to explain the
plural ‘ ¢hey shall count holy,’ and
originally written in the margin.
The word used (yéled, not én) is
not found with ‘Jacob’ or ‘ Israel’
elsewhere. I have not, however,
ventured to excise the suspected
words. For the change, which the
proposed reading implies, from the
collective singular to the plural,
comp. xlii. 24, 25..——The work of
my hands]i.e., the divine judgment
(comp. v. 12).

*4 Erred in spirit] So Ps. xcv.
Io, ‘erring in the heart.’ Comp. on
xxxii. 6. Instruction] A word
in the gnomic style (six times
in Proverbs). Comp. on xxviii.
23-29.

CHAPTER XXX.

ISAIAH denounces the irreligious embassy to Egypt, which has now ac-
tually been sent. He predicts that Egypt will furnish no effective help
to Judah, and that this flagrant unbelief of the Jews will be punished by
the ruin of the state. But suddenly an impulse comes upon Isaiah to
soften his tone, and offer consolation. True, affairs are getting worse
and worse, but at the last extremity Jehovah will interpose for his waiting
people. A splendid description is then given of the Messianic glories,
followed by a definite prediction of the catastrophe in store for Assyria.
(See Analysis, 7. C. 4., p. 69.)

1 Alas for the unruly sons (it is Jehovah’s oracle), carrying
out a purpose which is not from me, and * weaving a web®
without my spirit, that they may add sin to sin; ? who set

© Pouring out a libation, Ges., Naeg.

1-7 The embassy and its useless-
ness. Alas for] So Dr. Kay,
comparing i. 4.— Not from me]
Same phrase in similar connection,

Hos. viii 4..—Weaving a web]
i.e., the proposed treaty with Egypt.
See Del. on rendering.

* Have not asked] A signifi-

CHAP, XXX.] ISAIAH,

175

forth to go down to Egypt, and have not asked at my mouth,
to flee unto the ° asylum of Pharaoh, and to take refuge in the
shadow of Egypt. *But the Pasylum of Pharaoh shall be
unto you for shame, and the refuge in the shadow of Egypt
for confusion. ‘ For when his princes appear in Zoan, and
his messengers arrive at Hanes, ’all shall be ashamed of
people who cannot profit them, who are not for help nor for
profit, but for shame and also for reproach. °®[* Utterance of
the beasts of the south-country.*] Through a land of trouble
and distress, whence come lioness and lion, viper and flying
dragon, they carry upon the necks of young asses their riches,
and upon the humps of camels their treasures, to people

who cannot profit them.

7Yea, the Egyptians—in vain and

» So Del. ; Fortress, Ges., Ew. &c. (see Del.’s note here and on Ps, xxxi. 3).

© See below.

cant indication of the place de-
manded by the prophets in the
theocracy.

4.5 The predominant or regula-
tive tense (speaking occidentally)
is the perfect. Isaiah in spirit sees
the ambassadors arrived in Egypt,
and meeting with a disgraceful dis-
appointment. Zoan... Hanes]
Zoan (see on xix. 11) and Hanes
(from the Egyptian Chenensu) or
Heracleopolis magna, had given
dynasties to Egypt, and were now
the capitals of petty kingdoms (see
Introd. to chap. xix.). Like Zoan,
it is still untouched by exploration.
People who cannot profit
them] So the Rab-shakeh (xxxvi.
6), and so Sargon, ‘ The people and
their evil chiefs, To fight against
me unto Pharaoh, The King of
Egypt, @ monarch who could not
save them, Their presents carried
and besought his alliance,’ (Smith,
Assyrian Canon, p. 130). Comp.
Introd. to chap. xxxi.

6° Utterance of the beasts of
the south] An early reader ap-
pears to have written this in the
margin, as a kind of catch-word to
mark this very peculiar verse. Or,
perhaps an editor inserted it, not
in the margin, but in the text, sup-
posing a new prophecy to begin

with this verse. It is, however,
impossible to separate vv. 6, 7
from the preceding verses, without
which they are unintelligible. By
the ‘beasts of the south,’ the inter-
polator meant those mentioned in
v. 6. Del., however, who still main-
tains the Isaianic origin of the title,
thinks the word rendered ‘beasts’
should rather be translated ‘river-
ox,’ or ‘river -horxe’ (hinpopotamus),
the Behemoth of Job xl. 15. This,
he remarks, is peculiarly suitable
in this connection as an emblem
of the pretentious but slow-moving
Egypt.—a land of trouble... |
i.e, the desert between Palestine
and Egypt. Comp. Deut. viii. 15,
Jer. ii. 6. Viper and fiying
dragon] King Esar-haddon, relat-
ing the hardships he underwent
in a province of Arabia, says that
‘of snakes and scorpions like flies
(Delitzsch, “locusts ”) the land was
full’ (Fox Talbot, after Oppert,
T. S. B.A. iv. 260). As to the
‘flying dragon,’ see on xiv. 29..—
Their riches] i.e., their presents
for the Pharaoh.

72 proclaim...] The ob-
jection to alt. rend. is that it does
not suit the following words, which
present not a new name, but an
explanation of an old one. Isaiah

176

ISATATI.

[CHAP. XXX,

empty is their help, therefore 41 proclaim concerning it4
(Egypt), ‘ Rahab! they are utter indolence.’

8 Now go, write it on a tablet before them, and inscribe it
on a scroll, that it may serve to an after-day ° for a testimony &

for ever.

° For it is a disobedient people, lying sons, sons that

will not hear the teaching of Jehovah, '° who say to the seers,
Ye shall not see, and to the prophets, Ye shall not prophesy
unto us right things ; speak unto us smooth things, prophesy
illusions, turn aside from the way, decline from the path,

4 T name it, Ges., Hitz., Ew., Del., Naeg.
© So Sept., Pesh., Vulg., Targ., Lo., Ew., Kr.—For a perpetuity, Vowel-points,

avails himself of the popular taste
for pungently ironical humour. The
riddle of ‘ Ariel’ receives its coun-
terpart in that of Rahab!... in-
dolence] ‘Rahab-hém-shébheth.’
Rahab was a name for Egypt in
Hebrew poetry (see li. 9, with note,
Job xxvi. 12, Ps. Ixxxvil. 4, 1xxxix.
10), derived from mythology and
expressing the characteristic and
immense ‘arrogance’ of the Egyp-
tians (‘ventosa et insolens natio,’
as Pliny in his Panegyric calls
them). Simply in Jer. 1. 31, 32
Babylon is called ‘ Pride’ (zadon).
Isaiah’s point is that the name
Rahab had better be exchanged
for Shébheth, i.e., ‘inaction,’ so in-
capable have its bearers showed
themselves of carrying out their
promises. Obs. Rahab is used
collectively, like ‘ Egypt’ in the first
verse-half. [J do not feel sure, how-
ever, that the text is correct. Comp.
Olshausen’s note on Job ix. 13.]

8,9 Here Isaiah pauses in his
discourse, warned, perhaps, by the
threatening looks of the bystanders.
An inner voice bids him (so I un-
derstand v. 8) first of all write a
few words, such as ‘ Rahab—they
are all inaction,’ upon a tablet in
the large common character to be
set up ‘before them’ in public (pre-
cisely as in villi. 1), and then in-
scribe the prophecy more fully on
ascroll. For the latter a special
reason is added. Isaiah’s contem-
poraries refuse to listen to any but
flattering prophecies, so that unless

perpetuated by writing, the recent
revelation will be ineffectual.—This
is probably the earliest passage of
certain date in which a Biblical
author distinctly asserts the per-
petual validity of his writing. Of
course, in order to be ‘a testimony
for ever,’ the prophecy of Isaiah
must be stripped of its temporary
references, and Rahab and Israel
regarded as types of permanent
phases of character.— dnscribe]
Lit., carve or engrave, synonymous
with ‘write’ as x. 1, Job xix.
23, and in late Hebrew (Zunz,
Z.D.M. G. xxv. 441). Scroll]
Hebr. séfer. The Chald. form sfar
is used in the Mishna of the skins
of animals (Low, Beétrdge, p. 115).
Root, to scrape or smooth.

10 Prophets . prophesy |
The Hebr. has ‘seers . . . see’—
different words from the preceding.
The Germans well ‘seher’ and
‘schauer..——Ye shall not pro-
phesy] We can already detect the
germs of the persecution which
broke out, as may be rightly inferred,
with such severity under Manasseh ;
comp. v. 20, Mic. ii. 6, 11, Am. ii. 12
and 2 Chr. xxiv. 20, 21 (the fate
of Zechariah). Speak unto us
smooth things] Here is the secret,
of the opposition between the two
classes of prophets (the ‘true’ and
the ‘ false’), viz., that the one makes
prosperity conditional on righteous-
ness or repentance, the other does
not. See Jer. xxiii. 21, 22 (quoted
in 7, C..A., p. 73), and cf. Ezek. xiii.

CHAP. Xxx] 177
abolish out of our sight the Holy One of Israel! ' There-
fore thus saith the Holy One of Israel, Because ye reject this
word, and trust in ‘ wile and policy, and rely thereon, '* there-
fore this guilt shall be unto you as a rent portion that falleth,
bulging out in a high wall, whose breaking cometh suddenly
in a moment; and he will break it as one breaketh an
earthen pitcher, shivering it unsparingly, so that not a sherd
is found in its shivered pieces for taking fire from the hearth,
or drawing water from acistern. |!° For thus hath the Lord
said, even Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, By returning and
rest should ye be saved, in quietness and in confidence should
be your strength, but ye have refused ; and ye have said,
No, but on horses will we fly ; therefore shall ye flee ; and,
On the swift will we ride; therefore swift shall be those that
pursue you. !7One thousand at the rebuke of one, at the
rebuke of five shall ye flee, till ye be left as a pine on the top

ISAIAH.

of a mountain, and as a signal on a hill.

18 And therefore

f So Gr. (transposing two letters).—Oppression, Hebr. text. (See crit. note.)

-Yhis word] i.e., the prophecy
against the Egyptian alliance, the
policy of which, in contrast with
simple faith in Jehovah, is called in
the parallel line wile and policy
(lit. perverseness and crookedness),
comp. xxix. 15. The reading ‘op-
pression’ is explained to mean the
oppressive measures used for col-
lecting the subsidy to Egypt (comp.
2 Kings xv. 20), but this is rather
forced, and spoils the parallelism.

18 Therefore this guilt... ]
Sin, when it is mature, develops
into punishment—one of the fun-
damental laws of God’s kingdom,
according to the prophets (see on
v. 18,and comp. i. 31, xxxiii. 11, 12,
James i. 15). On the figure which
tollows, see Sir E. Strachey, Hebrew
Politics, p. 285.

“Not a sherd ... ] ‘It is very
common to find at the spring or the
pit pieces of broken jars to be used
as ladles, either to drink from or to
fill with ; and bits of fractured jars
are preserved for this purpose.’
Thomson, Zite Land and the Book
(1881), p. 37.

15 The conditions of the proffered
deliverance are returning and rest.

VOL. IL

‘Returning’ here is not ‘conver-
sion’ (as Henderson, comp. i. 27),
but the abandonment of the dis-
quieting, distracting search for
earthly aids (comp. Ps. cxvi. 7).
Thus Ew. and Del. both have frag-
ments of the meaning.

16 Worses and fly rhyme in the
Hebr. The horses are those of
Egypt, xxxi. 3; they are of course
representative of creaturely objects
of confidence.

7 One thousand...] A fa-
vourite hyperbole, see Deut. xxxil.
30, Josh. xxiii. 10, Lev. xxvi.8. An
Egyptian parallel in the inscription
of king Pianchi, transl. by Cook:
‘Many shall turn their backs on a
few, and one shall rout a thousand.’

18 wherefore] Because of the
extremity of your need. So x. 23,
24; ‘The Lord shall make a con-
sumption... Therefore... be
not afraid of Assyria”—The ren-
dering and meaning of this passage
are much disputed (see crit. note) ;
the two verbs of the received text
seem to me entirely inconsistent 5
the emendation of a ‘tittle’ (Matt.
v. 18) restores harmony.—Here, I
cannot help thinking, we have an

N

178 ISAIAH. [CHAP. Xxx.

will Jehovah long till he can be gracious unto you, and
therefore will he %wait in stillness% till he can have com-
passion upon you, for Jehovah is a God of righteousness ;
happy are all those that long for him!

'8 For 8a people shall dwell ® in Zion, in Jerusalem ; thou
shalt weep no more: he will surely be favourable unto thee at
the voice of thy cry ; as soon as he heareth it, he hath an-
swered thee. *° And ithough the Lordi give you bread in
short measure and water in scant quantity, thy * teachers shall
no more have to conceal themselves, but thine eyes shall con-
stantly see thy ‘teachers ; *! and thine ears shall hear a word
behind thee, saying, ‘This is the way, walk ye in it,’ when ye
turn tothe right hand, and when ye turn to the left. * And
ye shall defile the covering of thy silver graven images, and
the overlaying of thy golden molten images, thou shalt scatter

& (Adopting another reading.) Be on high, Hebr. text.
4 O people who dwellest, Ew.
! The Lord shall (taking the verse as a qualified promise], Del., Kay.
* Teacher, Ew., Kay, Wellh. (Gesch. /sr. i. 60), Robertson Smith (Zhe Old Testa-

ment, &c., p. 282) ; not Del.

instance of the combination of dis-
courses delivered at different times.
The paragraph to which v. 18 forms
the transition seems to me distinctly
to imply that invaders are already in
the land. A God of righteous-
ness] A God who faithfully carries
out his covenant, showing favour
to his people and wrath to his
enemies.

19-33 The true confidence, and its
reward, For] Because Jehovah
is secretly longing to show mercy.
Or, confirmatory of the last clause,

= yea.——A people shall dwell]
The national continuance is as-
sured.——In Sion] With an allu-

sion to the sacredness of Jehovah’s
abode. Zion was the title for Jeru-
salem regarded as a holy city (comp.
ii. 3, iv. 3, xvili. 7). But, to prevent
any misunderstanding, or, with af-
fectionate emphasis, the prophet
adds, ‘in Jerusalem.’

20 Though the Lord give you
, » . | Judgment shall be tempered
with mercy. The first compensating
benefit arising out of the siege will
be that the silenced prophets of
Jehovah shall emerge from their

hiding-places (see on wv. Io), and
the Divine oracles be once more
constantly heard. Alt. rendering
is quite possible, and is temptingly
set forth by Dr. Kay; but the
image of Jehovah in person as a
guide and teacher has no analogy
in this prophecy. In chaps. xl.-
Ixvi. it would be more intelligible
(comp. xl. 11).

21 A new figure, not a continua-
tion of v. 20. With the inner ear,
the Jews shall have a divinely
whispered warning, whenever they
are tempted to leave the straight
path. The opposite of xxviii. 11.

“ But before a fresh shower of
blessings can descend, the nation
must make a decided break with
the past :—they must destroy the
instruments of their sin, the idols.
The ‘high places’ are not men-
tioned ; was Isaiah indifferent to
their abolition? Has the narrative
in Kings exaggerated the reforms of
Hezekiah? See Last Words, vol.
i.——And ye... ] So text; but
it may be an error for the second
person sing. Graven... mol-
ten images] ‘Graven, i.e., carved,

CHAP. XXX.] ISATATI. 179
them as loathsomeness ; thou shalt say unto it, Go out. > And
he shall give rain for thy seed, with which thou sowest the
ground, and bread-corn as the increase of the ground—it
shall be juicy and fat ; thy cattle shall feed in that day ina
broad pasture. * And the oxen and the young asses which
till the ground shall eat mixed provender with salt, winnowed
with the shovel and with the fan. ** And on every lofty
mountain and on every high hill shall be rivulets and water-
courses, in the day of the great slaughter, when the towers
fall. %6 And the light of the moon shall be as the light of the
sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold! in the day
that Jehovah bindeth up the breach of his people, and healeth

the wound of their stroke.

27 Behold, the Name of Jehovah cometh from far, burning

1 TEXT inserts, ‘as the light of seven days.’

in reference to the inner solid figure
of wood ; molten, i.e., overlaid or
covered, in reference to the out-
ward metalline case or covering.
Sometimes both epithets are ap-
plied at once: “I will cut off the
graven and molten image,” Nah.
i. 14, (Bishop Horsley).——The
covering] Specially mentioned as
a proof of earnestness, the overlay-
ing being the most costly part of
the images. The practice of gilding
images was also an Assyrian and
Babylonian one (comp. Dan. iii. 1).
——Seatter them] Comp. Ex.
Xxxii. 20, 2 Kings xxiii. 6.

*3 After this, we should expect
to hear of the destruction of the
foe (as in xxxi. 8, comp. 7), but this
grand feature in the description is
reserved for the end. First of all,
the minds of the hearersare relieved
as to their means of living.

4 ‘His mercies are over all his
works.’ The idea of the ‘solida-
rity’ of all living creatures pervades
the O.T.——Shovel and fan] I
retain this conventional rendering.
On the very primitive instruments
which are probably intended, see
Consul Wetzstein, in an excursus
to Delitzsch’s Jesaza, ed. 2, p. 707.

5 The irrigation of the soil—a
prominent feature of Messianic
descriptions ; see Am. ix. 13, Joel

iii. 18, and especially Ezek. xlvii.
Obs. the streams flow not only in
the plains, but among the sun-
parched mountains and hills (so
xli. 18). The meaning of the Hebr.
root yabhal (=Ass. abdlu) is ‘to
bring’ (here of artificial water-
courses),—Slaughter . . towers]
The ‘slaughter’ is that of Jehovah’s
enemies, within Israel (xxviii. 18-
21) as well as without. The ‘towers’
are allirreligious means of security
(comp. ii. 12),—not the Assyrian
warriors, an image without analogy
in Isaiah.

26 ¢God, in whose light we see
light, will make the days go brighter’
[‘gratior it dies,’ Horace] ‘in the
sense of his favour and peace’ (R.
Williams). Comp. Job xi. 17. But
Isaiah meant more than this, It is
the glorification of nature to which
the prophet here, as in chap. xi.,
refers. ‘Largior hic campos ether
et lumine vestit Purpureo’ (Virgil,
“En, vi. 640). The arithmetical
interpretation found in text (see
note') belongs to some late scribe
(in Palestine, not in Egypt, see
Sept.). —— Buildeth up _ the
breach... ] Same imageas ini, 5.

27-383 A symbolic description of
the judgment, introduced by a theo-
phany. It is indeed not Jehovah
in the absolute sense who comes,

N2

180

ISATAH.

[cHaP. Xxx.

with anger, and in thick uplifting of smoke ; his lips are full
of indignation, and his tongue like devouring fire ; *8 and his
breath is like an overflowing torrent, dividing even to the
neck, to swing nations in the fan of nothingness, and a bridle
which leadeth astray (shall be) upon the cheeks of the peoples.
*®From you the song shall be as in the night when a feast

but the name of Jehovah, i.e., that
side of Jehovah which is mani-
fested to the world, or, as Del. con-
cisely puts it, ‘the God of Revela-
tion.” Theform of expression was
easily intelligible to Isaiah’s readers,
being common to the Hebrew with
the Pheenician religion (see on xxvi.
8). There is no figure of speech in
it; Isaiah has a firm, though not
logically defined, belief in the mani-
foldness of the Divine Being. The
Name is obviously a ‘ person,’ or
perhaps better a ‘persona.’ See
xviii. 7, xxvi. 8,and notes on lix. 19,
Ixiii. 9. Also Del’s note on Prov.
xviii. 10 In the description which
follows, the two figures of a storm
and of an angry man are fused
together.—— Indignation] Dr.
Robertson Smith, ‘angry foam.’
But the cognate word in Arabic is
used of the roaring of an irritated
animal. —— Devouring fire]
Comp. ix. 19, x. 17, xxix. 6, xxxill.
14, Ex. xxiv. 17, Deut. ix. 3.

28 The awful appearance comes
stormily along. His breath is like
a torrent in autumn time, which all
but covers the man who has fallen
into it (comp. viii. 8); and his ob-
ject is to swing nations (i.e., to
sift them with a violent motion of
the hand) in the fan of (reducing
them to) nothingness (comp. xxix.
5). The good Osiris, too, in his
character of judge, is said to be
represented with a flail or whip.
And a bridle. . .] A fresh
figure, borrowed form hunting
(comp. Ezek. xix. 4, xxix. 4), with
perhaps an allusion to a cruel
practice of Eastern conquerors
(see on xxxvil. 29). A new and
terrible feature is suggested in the
words, ‘which leadeth astray.’ The
Assyrians are to be led against

their will into paths which end in
ruin (so Job xii. 24, 25).

*” The fall of Assyria shall be
greeted with dancing and with
music. Sir E. Strachey appositely
quotes the similar conduct of the
neighbours of Athens on the de-
struction of the Pirzeus (Grote, ix.
449). In neither case can we quite
sympathise ; still there are certain
collateral thoughts in Isaiah’s mind,
to be gathered from this and the
other prophecies, which give a dif-
ferent colour to its anticipated
rejoicing. Comp. also Ps. lviii. ro,
II. As in the night when a
feast is consecrated (i.e., opened
by an introductory religious cere-
mony ; compare Ex. xix. 22).
It is not improbable that the
Passover had just taken place.
Isaiah had predicted (xxix. 1)
that when the feasts had ‘gone
round,’ the dreaded enemy should
be brought low, so that when
the next Passover had ushered in
the new (religious) year, it would
be time to expect the fulfilment.
The appropriateness of the refer-
ence is obvious, the danger from
Assyria being hardly less than
that at the Exodus. There is also
an allusion to the Passover in xxxi.
5 (see note). The mention of the
night-celebration (‘asin the night’
&c.) agrees with the directions
about the Passover, Ex. xii. 6, 8,
42,comp. Matt. xxvi. 30; and Ibn
Ezra even refers to a (doubtless
Agadic) story that Sennacherib’s
army perished on the Paschal night.
On the other hand, Ewald and
Wellhausen (the latter influenced
by xxxii. 10) think it is the Feast
of Tabernacles (or of the Ingather-
ing) which is intended. This was
essentially a joyous festival, and

181

CHAP. XXX.] ISAIAH.

is ‘consecrated, and there shall be joy of heart, like his who
setteth forth to the flute to come to the mountain of Jehovah,
unto the Rock of Israel. ®° And Jehovah shall cause the
™ peal of his voice to be heard, and the lighting down of his
arm to be seen, in fury of anger, and the flame of devouring
fire, the bursting of clouds, and a storm of rain, and hail-
stones. *! For at the voice of Jehovah shall Asshur be panic-
stricken, when he shall strike with the rod; *and it shall
come to pass that whenever the destined staff passeth over,
which Jehovah letteth down upon him from above, it shall be
with timbrels and with lutes ; and with battles of swinging
will he fight against them. ** For a Topheth hath been set in
order beforehand ; it "also is™ prepared for ° Moloch ; he hath

m So Dr. B, Davies. » Ts also, Ew., Del.
© The king, Ew., Del., Naeg., &c.

at a Jater time there was a very
elaborate night-ritual for its ob-
servance (see Haneberg’s Relzg.
Alterthiimer, 676-9). It is men-
tioned by Hosea (xii. 9), and is
constantly referred to as ‘ the feast,’
see I Kings viii. 2,65, xii. 32, Ezek.
xlv. 25 (see Hebr.), 2 Chr. vii. 8,9,
and throughout the Mishna (Zunz)!
—the Passover is only so called in
the NewTestament (e.g. Matt. xxvi.
5). It is of course possible that
Isaiah was not referring to one
feast more than another ; see, how-
ever, on xxix. I 4 (against Well-
hausen).——-Who_ setteth forth
to the flute] This must be a day-
celebration which is referred to—
probably the festal processions of
pilgrims from the country. Vitrin-
ga and others think of the proces-
sion of those who brought up the
first-fruits, comparing the Talmudic
treatise Bzekurim, iil. 3, not, how-
ever, a perfectly reliable authority
(Herzfeld, Gesch. iii. 128, 159).
Obs., there is no mention of the
Levitical singers here, but Jerusalem
is distinctly recognized as the re-
ligious centre (comp. xxxiii. 20).
The Rock of Israel] ‘Rock’ was
one of the synonyms for Jehovah ;
so xvii. 10, xliv. 8, comp. Deut. xxxii.

(six times), also the proper names
Zuriel, Zurishaddai. Again a phrase
of mythic origin.

50 The peal of his voice] See
Del. on Job xxxix. 20. The ‘voice’
is the thunder ; comp. Ps. xxix.

82 The destined staff] Comp.
Hab. i. 12: ‘O Jehovah, thou hast
appointed them (same verb) for
judgment.’—The timbrels, &c. are
those with which the Jews are prais-
ing God. Battles of swinging]
ie., those in which Jehovah swings
his rod and deals blows to his ene-
mies, comp. xix. 16,

83 A Topheth] Hebr., zophiech,
perhaps a derivative of Topheth =
a place suitable for human sacri-
fices, like Topheth (or rather the
Topheth, as it is an appellative).
See Jer. xix. 13, ‘the place of the
Topheth.’ Beforehand] viz., in
the Divine counsels. It also is
prepared for Moloch] ‘It also,’
like the high places of the Topheth,
is prepared for a great burning for
Moloch (the heavenly ‘ king,’ or na-
tional god).—‘ What greater honour
could there be for the god wha
delights in human sacrifices, than
that Sennacherib and his army
should be slain and burned in his
honour?’ There is a precisely

1 Plutarch also, in treating of a festivals, speaks of this as ‘their greatest

and most perfect one’ (Symp. iv. 6, 2).

182

ISALAIL.

(CHAP. XXX1.

made it deep and broad ; the pile thereof hath fire and much

wood ; the breath of Jehovah, like a torrent of brimstone

shall kindle upon it.

similar form of expression in xxxiv.
6, where the (figurative) sacrifice is
destined for Jehovah. It is true,
Isaiah nowhere else refers to Mo-
loch, but we know from Jer. vii. 31,
xix. 13, 2 Kings xxili, 10, comp.
Isa. lvii. 5, that sacrifices of children
were offered to Moloch in the pre-
Exile period, and the Chronicles
specially mention the reign of
Ahaz as one in which this took
place. This, which I prefer, is also
the view of Geiger, Krochmal, and
Dr. Payne Smith. In a slightly
different form it is held by Luzzatto,
Del., and Kuenen, who find in the
passage a witty allusion to the
double meaning of Mélek. The
real Topheth was for Moloch (rather
Molek, a dialectic form of Mélek),
the heavenly king, the metaphori-
cal one for the king of Assyria.
In this case, we must substitute
‘the king’ for ‘ Moloch.’ Alt. rend.,
however, is quite justifiable; see
Del. on Job. ii. ro. It makes the
clause simply the statement of a
fresh fact concerning the Topheth.

?

The king will then be simply ‘the
great king, the king of Assyria)
who, though he has to be burned
like a malefactor (Josh. vii. 25,
Lev. xx. 14, xxi. 9), deserves at any
rate these grandiose preparations.
If this view be adopted, the pro-
phecy will be slightly inconsistent
with that in xxxi. 8, 9, where Isaiah
seems to speak as if the enemy
would take flight, and return to his
own land (comp. xxxvii. 34). This,
however, is no objection, for as Dr.
Riehm remarks, ‘the prophets in
order to make their threatenings
and promises forcible and impres-
sive, frequently painted in detail
the features of approaching judg-
ment or mercy, without attaching
particular importance to the details
themselves, or wishing to make the
truth of the prediction dependent
upon their harmony’ (Messianic
Prophecy, p. 246). Deep and
broad] To take in the Assyrian
king and his whole army (as
XXXili, 12).

CHAPTER XXXI.

UNABLE to prevent the negotiations with Egypt, Isaiah exhibits forcibly
their disastrous consequences to both the parties concerned. He speaks
as if he expected that the Egyptians would actually go out to fight against
the Assyrians, but that they would suddenly be overthrown by the hand
of Jehovah (v. 3). As a further explanation, the prophet adds that
Jehovah himself will descend to save mount Zion from its besiegers, and
appeals to his countrymen to return to their allegiance to Jehovah.

‘Woe unto those that go down to Egypt for help, and
rely upon horses ; and that trust in chariots because they are

1 Rely upon horses] Comp.
xxx. 16. The only power which
could compare with Assyria in its
equipments for war was Egypt,
the reputation of whose cavalry is

forcibly shown by Sennacherib’s
description of the battle of Altaku
(X. P. i. 36). Every petty local
king had his stud; his noblest
tribute is ‘the best horses of his

CHAP. XXXI.]

ISAIAH.

183

many, and in horsemen because they are very strong, but
have not looked unto the Holy One of Israel, and have not
consulted Jehovah ; ?(though he also is wise,) but he will
bring evil to pass, and his words he will not set aside, and
will arise against the house of evil-doers, and against the

helpers of those that work wickedness.

3 Yea, the Egyptians

are men and not God, and their horses flesh and not spirit ;
and if Jehovah stretch out his hand, he that helpeth will
stumble, and he that is helped will fall, and they all will be

consumed together.

stables’—see Lenormant, Les pre-
mibres civilisations, i. 311-3, and
comp. Hom., //. ix. 383, 4, Ex. xiv.
6, 9, 1 Kings x. 28, 29. Strange to
say, however, there is no represen-
tation of Egyptian cavalry on the
monuments. The weakness of
Judah in cavalry is sirikingly shown
by xxxvi. 8. Isaiah censures the
efforts to remedy inis weakness as
religious treason, comp. on ii. 8.

2 Though he also is wise]
Ironically ; ‘he also, as well as
the Jewish politicians (xxix. 14).
As Ewald remarks, it was a novelty
to call Jehovah wise, due to the
influence of the Wise Men (see on
Xxvill. 23-29). His words] A
revealed word being self-fulfilling
(see on ix. 8). The ‘ words’ referred
to here are such as xxix. 14, Xxx.

13-22. The house of evil-
doers . those that work
wickedness] i.e., the untheocratic

Jews who direct the affairs of the
nation.

3 wren and not God] Comp.
v.8. So Hos. xi. 9, ‘1am God and
not man, i.e., specifically different
from man (see on x. 15).——Flesh
and not spirit] i.e., dependent
creatures, without any life in them-
selves (xl. 6, 7), and sure to disap-
point (Jer. xvii. 5,6). The idea of
‘flesh’ as essentially sinful is a
derived one.

4 As the lion... ] No pas-
sage in the book of Isaiah, observes
Del., has such a Homeric ring as
this (comp. J/. xviii, 161-2, xii.
299-302). As the lion will not give
up his prey, so Jehovah will not

4For thus saith Jehovah unto me, As

allow the Assyrians to rob him of
his ‘peculiar treasure,’ Jerusalem.
The title Jehovah Sabdoth is here
peculiarly appropriate (see appendix
to chap. i.); it has also governed
the selection of the verb for fight.—
The rendering ‘fight upon’ (and not
‘fight against’) mount Zion seems
to me to be required by the terms
of the figure ; and to be confirmed
by the title ‘God’s Lion’ in xxix.
1. The ‘growling’ of the lion
‘over his prey’ corresponds to
the thunder amidst which (comp.
xxix. 6) Jehovah shall join the fray
‘upon mount Zion.’ If the prophet
had merely meant to say that
Jehovah would execute vengeance
upon Jerusalem, he would not have
selected a figure expressive of the
determination with which the lord
of a valuable possession resists all
attempts to deprive him of it, In
fact, supposing that the descent of
Jehovah is hostile to Jerusalem, the
object compared to Jehovah must
surely be, not the lion who resists,
but the shepherds who attack,
which of course the tenor of the
description renders impossible. It
is a subsidiary argument in favour
of my view that the next verse
contains a promise. The figure of
the hovering birds exactly corre-
sponds to that of the lion growling
over his prey. It is natural, then,
to regard v. 6 as a further develop-
ment on the same lines as v. 5.
Still, I freely admit that, were Del.’s
interpretation of v. 5 in itself the
more probable, we could explain
v. 6 on the analogy of xxix. 2, which

184 ISAIAH.

(CHAP. XXXL

the lion with the young lion growleth over his prey, against
whom there is called a troop of shepherds,—at their cry he is
not dismayed, and at their noise he is not cast down,—so
shall Jehovah Sabdoth descend to fight “upon mount Zion
and* upon the hill thereof. * Like birds hovering, so shall
Jehovah Sabdaoth shelter Jerusalem, sheltering and delivering,
passing over and rescuing. §® Return ye unto him, against
whom they have gone deep in transgression, O children of
Israel.

7 For in that day they shall reject every one his not-gods
of silver and his not-gods of gold, which your hands made you
for a sin, §and Assyria shall fall by the sword of one who is
not a man, and the sword of one who is not earth-born shall
devour him; and he shall take his flight from the sword,
and his young men shall be put to forced labour : 9 and ” his
rock shall pass away ” through terror, and his princes shall be

® So Ges., Ew.—Against. Del.. Kay, Weir, Naeg.
> He shall pass by his rock, Ges., Ew.

has a transition as abrupt as that
which Del. supposes to exist in v. 6.

5 Jehovah is like a lion to his
foes, but like a mother-bird to his
own. Strong and bold and coura-
geous as the lion, tender and pro-
vident as the bird, but, unlike even
the eagle, able under all circum-
stances to repe] the assailant.
There is a similar effective contrast
of figures in Mic. v. 7, 8. For the
comparison of Jehovah to a lion,
see xxxviil. 13, Hos. v. 14, x. 10,
Am. i. 2, Jer. xxv. 38; to a bird,
Deut. xxxil. 11. Other bird-similes
in I. Isaiah, x. 14, xvi, 23 in
II. Isaiah, xl. 31, lix. 11, Ix. 8,
Passing cover] The explanation
of the Passover (Pésakh) presup-
posed in Exodus (xi. 13) seems to
be well known to Isaiah.

° Return ye... ] Those who
adhere to the ordinary sense of the
imperative have to supply the con-
nection from the statements of
Isaiah elsewhere. Jerusalem will
be sifted ‘in that day,’ and only
those who ‘return,’ or are converted,
will be saved, Therefore, return
in time. It is also possible to take
the imperative here as conveying a

strong assurance ; comp. x. 21 for
the thought and xxxiii. 20 for the
idiom. (The change of person is
harsh, but see next verse.)

7 The casting away of the idols is
not a mark of despairing irritation
(as in ii. 20), but of repentance.
What the prophet asked for in v. 6,
he predicts in v. 7.

* The sword] This symbolic
phrase (see on xxvii. I) suggests a
storm of thunder and lightning ;
comp. xxix. 6.

® His rock] (lit., his cliff) ie,
the king of Assyria (Luther, Del.,
Riehm, Naeg.), whose name and
power had hitherto been ‘as the
shadow of a huge cliff’ to his ser-
vants. The expression is singular,
but not more so than xix. 13 (which
see). Two points must be held
firmly, 1, that ‘his rock’ is the sub-
ject, on account of the parallelism,
which is very closely preserved in
this chapter; and 2. that the ‘rock’
is a person.—Hitzig’s explanation,
‘the rock on which Asshur thought
himself so firmly planted’ (comp.
Ps. xxx. 7), is unsuitable to the
words ‘through terror.” Perhaps
the word for ‘cliff’ was selected in

CHAP. XXXII]

panic-stricken at the signal:

ISAIAH.

185

the oracle of Jehovah, who

hath his fire in Zion, and his furnace in Jerusalem.

preference to that for ‘rock’ on
account of the specially religious
acceptation of the latter term (e.g.,
Deut. xxxii. 31).——The signal]
The sight of the signal-pole, which
formed the Jewish rallying-point
(xiii. 2), shall throw the Assyrian

furnace] Not with reference to the
altar of sacrifice (comp. xxix. 1?), for
‘furnace’ is never used in this
connection, but symbolically of
the light of Jehovah’s presence on
mount Zion, which is a protection
to his friends, a destruction to his

princes into a panic. Fire...

enemies (Del.). Comp. x. 17.

CHAPTER XXXII.

Vv. 1-8 ought clearly to be separated from vv. 9-20. They corre-
spond to the close of another great anti-Assyrian prophecy—chap. xi.,
and describe the happy condition of Judah when idols have been cast
away (xxxi. 7), and the rod of Assyrian tyranny has been removed.
A more just and merciful government—nay, an absolutely perfect go-
vernment—shall then be enjoyed, the result (as we must infer from
xxxii. 15) of a large outpouring of the divine Spirit. ‘As the conse-
quence of this, moral distinctions shall no longer be confounded, men
shall be estimated at their real value; a general prediction, which is
here applied to two specific cases, vv. 5-8’ (Alexander).—The pro-
phecy is Messianic, but not in the narrower sense which has been
derived from a mistranslation of v. 2. It seems as if Isaiah sometimes
(comp. xxxiii. 17) cherished the hope that the hereditary wearer of the
Davidic crown would prove a worthy vicegerent of the supreme King,
Jehovah. All prophecy is conditional. The tone of Isaiah in another
prophecy written probably in the same period (x. 5-xi.), but somewhat
later, seems to me to prove that there had really been an outpouring
of the divine Spirit on the ruling class of Jerusalem (comp. Introd.
to chap. xxii, end). If Hezekiah had been capable of receiving the
Messianic gifts in full measure, the prediction in ix. 6, 7, would have
been (from the prophetic point of view) sufficiently fulfilled in him.
When Isaiah wrote xxxii. 1, he may have had grounds for the chari-
table belief that his sovereign would really be equal to the demands
providentially made upon him. All that was certain to him was
the coming of a new era for Israel and for the world, and whether the
leadership of Israel would then be granted to the natural heir of
David, or to Another, depended on Hezekiah’s responsible exercise of
his free will.

1 Behold, righteously the king shall reign, and the princes

(as in xxxiii. 17). If Hezekiah is
meant, his character has been
purged of its dross. At any rate,

1-8 Regenerate Judah.
1 whe king] Or rather, royalty—
putting aside the person altogether

186 ISAIAH, (CHAP. Xxx,

justly shall they rule: 2and *a great man®* shall be as a
hiding-place from the wind, and a covert from the rain-storm,
as rivulets in a parched land, as the shadow of a huge cliff
in a thirsty land. 3 And the eyes of those who see shall
not be closed, and the ears of those who hear shall hearken;
“and the heart of the hasty shall perceive distinctly, and the
tongue of the stammerers shall be prompt to speak plainly.
> No more shall the fool be called noble, and the knave shall
no more be named gentle. ® For the fool speaketh folly, and
his heart prepareth wickedness, practising profanity, and
uttering error concerning Jehovah, to make empty the soul
of the hungry, and to cause the drink of the thirsty to fail;
7and »the machinations of the knave” are evil, it is he who
deviseth plots, to ruin the afflicted by lying words, even when
the poor speaketh that which is right, * but the noble deviseth
noble things, and Ze to noble things shall stand.

* Aman, Kay. Vir (ille), Vitr.—Each one, Ges., Ew., Del., Naeg.
> As for a mean man, his means, Rodwell (a paronomasia),

Vy. 9-20. A supplementary address to the women, gathered, we may
suppose, at a little distance from the rest, and testifying their indifference
(comp. iii. 16-24). The prophet warns them that their self-pleasing and

nothing indicates that the Messiah
is intended ; king and princes are
placed quite on a level, in accord-
ance with the actual state of things
under the so-called Monarchy.
Indeed, the character of the
‘ princes’ is of almost more import-
ance than that of the king—hence
the stress laid in the foll. verses on
the changed character of the go-
verning classes. Contrast the re-
buke in ili, 14, 15.

2 a great man] Strictly, anyone
(king or prince) who belongs to the
class of great men (dvdpes). Against
the rend. ‘each one,’ see Dr. Kay’s
note.

3 A spiritual change described
in symbols. Those who see... |
who ought to see, but are judicially
hardened (xxix. 10).

4 The heart] i.e., the mind (see
especially 1 Kings x. 2, 24).——
Hasty] Precipitate in decisions,

perhaps with an allusion to the
Egyptian alliance (Weir). (Same
word differently applied, xxxv. 4.)
The stammerers] Those
whose thoughts and words are in-
definite and inconsistent (Del.) ;
not, mockers, comp. xxviii. 14, &c.
(Knob., Drechsler).

5-8 Obs. the undercurrent of irony
towards the governing classes ; also
the growing tendency to the pro-
verbial style (see on xxviii. 23-29,
Xxxl. 2).——The fool] i.e., the un-
godly man, sin being the highest
folly ; see v. 6. Noble . . .
gentle] In rank ; not (as in ~. 8)
in character.

®° Error] Dr. Weir renders
‘heresy. In fact, in Rabbinic
Hebr. and in Aramaic the stem
does acquire the meaning of heresy
(and in Assyrian, of madness);
here, however, it is rather ‘practi-
cal atheism’ which is meant, comp.

CHAP. Xxx11.] ISAIAH. 187

security will not last much longer. He then describes the impending
judgment, and contrasts the true security with the false. There is a
point of contact with the foregoing long prophecy in v. 15 (see note).

®Ye women who are at ease, rise up, hear my voice; ye
©confident daughters, give ear unto my speech. 'Ina year
and days ye shall shudder, ye confident ones ; for the vintage
is consumed, the fruit-gathering cometh not. '! Tremble, ye
that are at ease ; shudder, ye confident ones ; strip you, and
make you bare, and gird sackcloth upon your loins. '!* They
shall smite upon the breasts for the pleasant fields, for the
fruitful vine. ‘Upon the land of my people thorns and
briars shall come up ; yea, upon all joyous houses of the
merry town. | For the palace shall be forsaken ; the hum of

© Self-flattering, Weir.

xxix. 15, Ps. xiv. 1. A similar Here is another illustration of the

phrase in xxix. 24. To make
empty the soul .. . | To deprive
him of that which would satisfy his
needs (see xxix. 8). Compare the
character of ‘Nabal’ (=Fool), I
Sam, xxv.

® who are at ease] i.e., uncon-
cerned. Always in a bad sense
(Am. vi. 1, Zech. i. 15, Ps. cxxiil.
4), except v. 18 and xxxili. 20.
Confident] Ina bad sense, com-
pare Am. vi. 1, ‘who are confident
in the mountain of Samaria.” Ina
good sense, xii. 2, Ps. xxvii. 3.

0n a yearand days| Lit.
(Add) days (whether many, as
Num. ix. 22 @. P. B., or few, as
Gen. xxiv. 55) to a year. Comp. on
xxix. I.——The vintage is con-
sumed] It is the perfect of pro-
phetic certitude. If the harvest
was already over when this short
prophecy was delivered (this would
bring the date down to July), the
words will have double force.

1. Strip you] See on xx. 2.

2 @hey shall smite... ] A
participle in the masc. gender.
‘Upon the breasts,’ for the sake
of a play upon words (shadéyim
‘breasts,’ s’dé ‘ fields’).

‘4 "he palace shall be for-
saken ... ] Perhaps the ‘ palace
of the king’s house’ (1 Kings xvi. 18,
comp. 2 Kings xv. 25) is meant.

vagueness of the outlines of Mes-
sianic prophecy (comp. /. C. A.,
p- 79). In the rest of this group of
prophecies (xxix. 5, xxx. 19, xxxi.
4), Isaiah apparently anticipates
that Jerusalem will be delivered
from the Assyrians, but here that
it will be destroyed, and lie for
some time in ruins. The conse-
quence is that the Messianic bless-
edness which is elsewhere drawn
closely together with the present,
is here thrown into an indefinitely
distant future. There are points of
contact, however, with earlier pro-
phecies, which show that anticipa-
tions of this gloomier kind were
frequent visitors to Isaiah (v. 9,
10, vi. 11-13), and connecting as
he did the political future with the
moral state of his country, it was
natural that the variations in his
view of the latter should reflect
themselves in his view of the
former. Parallel for the prediction
of the destruction of Jerusalem,
Mic. iii, 12, com». iv. 1. —The
mound] Hebr. ‘cshel, which was
the name of the steep southern
side of the temple-hill. The
watch-tower] i.e, perhaps the
‘tower of the flock,’ mentioned
in Mic. iv. 8, in connection with
‘the hill’ (7. C.A., p. 79).——wila
asses] which haunted the desert

188

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XXXII.

the city shall be deserted ; the mound and the watch-tower
shall be instead of caves for ever, the joy of wild asses, the
pasture of flocks, until the spirit be poured out upon us
from on high ; and the pasture country shall become a garden-
land, and the garden-land shall be counted for a forest, 'and
justice shall inhabit the pasture-country, and righteousness
shall dwell in the garden-land, ' and the fruit of righteousness
shall be peace, and the effect of righteousness quietness and
confidence for ever, '8and my people shall inhabit a home
of peace, and dwellings of confidence, and easeful resting-
places ; !° but it shall hail, when the forest cometh down, and

the city shall sink in abasement.

(Job xxiv. 5); they have now dis-
appeared from Palestine.

'S Until the spirit... ] ‘The
spirit giveth life,’ is the key to this
passage. The saying about Le-
banon’s becoming a garden-land
was probably a favourite one with
Isaiah (see on xxix. 17). It may
of course be taken either literally
or symbolically, but is best ex-
plained (as remarked already) of a
transformation of nature which
goes hand in hand with that of man.
The implication is that the life-
giving Spirit had been (ie, would
be) withdrawn not only from the
Jews, but from their land. Both
people and country were (ie.,
would be) reduced by oppression
to a mere shadow of what they had
been, far as even this was from
what they were destined to be.

16 The inward blessings shall cor-
respond to the outward. Wherever
there are human dwellings, be they
inthe uncultivated pasture-land orin
the fruitful garden-land, justice and
righteousness shall be housemates.

17 Allusion in James iii. 18.
Peace| In the objective sense=
welfare.

18 Of confidence ...
Comp. vv. 9-11, Xxxili. 20.

1 But last of all the prophet
must remind his readers that the
way to this ideal state lies through
bitter suffering. The ‘hail’ of
God’s judgments shall descend on
the forest, and ‘the city’ shall be

easeful]

°° Happy are ye who sow

utterly abased. Expositors seem
to be agreed that the ‘ forest’ means
the stately army of Assyria (comp.
x. 18, 19, 33, 34), and only to differ
as to the reference of ‘the city,’
which most critics suppose to be
Jerusalem, but Lowth and Ges.
take to be Nineveh, Drechsler and
Naeg. the city in which the hos-
tility of the world to Jehovah will
in the latter days be centralised ;
comp. Xxv. 2, xxvi. 5, 6, xxvii. Io,
11. The latter view, however, in
both its forms, is very improbable,
because the fate of Nineveh, or of
the future metropolis of antitheism,
is nowhere else referred to in this
group of prophecies. Still the
transition from the ‘forest’ ot
Assyria to the ‘city’ of Jerusalem
would be peculiarly abrupt, and is
not to be assumed except under
compulsion. It is usual, indeed, to
compare (see above) certain pas-
sages in which Assyria is likened
to a forest, but is there any reason
why the same figure should not
be applied to Judah? A very simi-
lar one zs so applied, in ii, 13 (at
once literal and symbolical), vi. 13,
xi. I. I therefore take the forest
to be a symbol of the proud and
scornful rulers of Judah, to whose
imminent judgment Isaiah actually
refers under the figure of hail in
Xxvili. 17.

20 ¢ Happy days will those be for
the tillers of the soil!’ A weak
conclusion, it may seem at first

CHAP. XXXIIL]

ISAIAII.

189

beside all waters, who let loose the foot of the ox and the

ass!

sight, but we must consider the
sufferings caused by the all but
total extinction of agriculture during
the Assyrian invasion. Besides,
agricultural prosperity is one of the
most constant and prominent fea-
tures in Messianic descriptions.
Dr. Weir explains rather differently.
‘Happy they who go steadily on,

doing the work committed to them
by God, alike in storm and in sun-
shine, confiding in the righteous-
ness of God.’ He compares the
close of chap. xxvill., and Eccles.
xi. I, 6. Beside all waters]
For there will be irrigation every-
where (xxx. 25), and unchecked
freedom in tilling the soil.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

RETRIBUTION to Assyria ; Israel’s extremity, Jehovah’s opportunity ; the
hope of a glorious future—but not for unbelievers. (See detailed analysis
I. C. A., p. 97.)—Date, the 25th (or 27th) year of Hezekiah, B.c. 701
(comp. top of p. 207), in which year the inscriptions place the invasion of
Sennacherib. The prophecy is highly figurative in style, and often ob-
scure. Ewald has a strong impression that it is not the work of Isaiah,
but of one of Isaiah’s disciples. There are, no doubt, a few peculiarities
of phraseology (see Ewald’s Prophets, ii. 254); but, as Ewald himself
admits, there are other phrases specially characteristic of Isaiah, and the
entire spirit reminds us of that prophet. Few, however, will deny that the
style is less uniformly sustained than usual, and it seems to me a reason-
able conjecture that Isaiah has left this prophecy imperfectly prepared
for publication. Perhaps this does but make it the more interesting.

1 Woe unto thee who spoilest, and hast not been spoiled,
and who dealest barbarously, and they have not dealt bar-
barously with thee! When thou shalt have ceased to spoil,
thou shalt be spoiled ; when thou shalt have finished dealing
barbarously, they shall deal barbarously with thee. *O
Jehovah! be favourable unto us; for thee have we waited:
be thou “our arm every morning, our salvation also in the
time of trouble. * At a tumultuous sound the peoples have

® So Lowth; TEXT, their.

1 Woe unto thee... ] Assyria,
who has dealt destruction to so
many, shall at length suffer violence
herself. Taking the two halves of
the verse, this seems more probable
than Hitzig’s view that it is a com-
plaint of unprovoked aggression.

2 The prophet concentrates his
moral energy on prayer, and is thus

enabled to realize the certainty of
what seemed so unlikely, the fall of
Assyria. He speaks in the name
of the ‘ fifty righteous’ (Gen. xviii.),
for whose sake God will spare a
city, many of them his own dis-
ciples.

3 ata tumaoltuous sound] The
word used suggests the image not

190 ISATAH, (CHAP. XXXII.

fled; at the lifting up of thyself the nations are scattered ;
“and your spoil is gathered as when caterpillars gather; as
when locusts run to and fro, he runneth upon it. * Jehovah
is secure, for he dwelleth in the height; he hath filled Zion
with justice and righteousness ; °and the steadfastness of thy
times shall be a store of salvations, (and) wisdom and know-

ledge: the fear of Jehovah is his treasure.

7 Behold, the Ariels cry
peace weep bitterly. *® The
wayfaring man hath ceased ;

so much of thunder (Ew., Knob.,
Del.), as of the sound of many
waters (comp. Jer. x. 13, Ezek. i. 24,
Rev. xix. 6). The peoples] As
represented in the Assyrian army.
At the lifting up ado
Num. x. 35, Ps. Ixviii. 1.

* Your spoil] Addressed to the
foe. Comp. v. 23. He runneta]
viz., the band of spoilers, or, dis-
tributively, each of its members.

* Two great spiritual facts: (1)
Jehovah by his deliverance of
Zion (regarded here as past), has
shown that he is secure, i.e., inac-
cessible to his enemies ; and (2) he
hath filled Zion with spiritual trea-
sures, the Messianic promise of the
Spirit (xxxii. 15, 16) being drawn
together into one with the over-
throw of the Assyrians.

®° Thy times] i.c., the ‘ changes
and chances’ of thy life (Ps. xxxi.
15). The pronoun refers to the
people of Judah._—Shall be] i.e.,
shall consist in.——A store of sal-
vations] ready for every need.
His treasure| With an implied re-
buke to the treasure-loving kings of
Judah ; or, as others think, with an
allusion to the large fine demanded
by Sennacherib(?see on chap.xxxvi).

712 The prophet has now
sketched the main outlines of his
revelation. It remains to fill in and
apply the details. He first describes
the apparently hopeless condition

without ; the messengers of
highways are desolate; the
he hath broken the covenant,

of Judah,—the mourning in the
capital and the desolation in the
country-districts\_The Ariels]
ie., ‘God’s lions, picked warriors
each as fierce as a lion, and as
invincible as his God (comp. xxix.
1)". How truly Homeric is the
scene! In fact, a childlike emo-
tional sensibility is characteristic
of the heroic age everywhere.
Comp. Judg. xx. 23, 1 Sam. xiii.
16 Sept.—The messengers of
peace| The ambassadors sent by
Hezekiah to Sennacherib; they
‘weep bitterly’ at the hard con-
ditions of peace. It is uncertain
whether 2 Kings xviii. 14 can be
compared; see Introd. to chap.
XXXVI.-XXX1X.

8 The returning ambassadors are
tne last citizens who have ventured
outside the walls. Comp. the pa-
rallel in Judg. v. 6. Then three
short passionate clauses about the
stern Assyrian, whom neither moral
obligations, nor fear of physical
force, nor respect for human life,
cancheck. He hath broken the
covenant] If (which I still doubt)
2 Kings xviii. 14 relates to this in-
vasion, this may allude to a slightly
later period, when it became clear
that Sennacherib would not be sa-
tisfied with the payment of a fine.
Despised cities] Explanatory
of the first clause. Comp. ‘ They
deride every stronghold,’ Hab. i. 10.

1 Strange as it seems that ‘God's lions’ should have been a generic term for ‘picked

warriors,’ I see no sufficient reason to doubt it.

The title comes from a primitive age,

when God was still generally known as Il, and when the most respected qualities were
those of the freebooter. Brugsch (Gesch, 4igyptens, p. 552) says that Ariel has also
this meaning in Egyptian, being one of a large class of words borrowed from Semitic.

CHAP. XXXIIL]

despised cities, regardeth not men.

ISAIAH.

Ig!

9The land mourneth,

languisheth ; Lebanon is ashamed, dried up; Sharon is
become like the desert, and Bashan and Carmel shake them-

selves.

Now will I rise, saith Jehovah; now will I exalt
myself; now will I lift up myself.

"Ye conceive hay, ye

shall bring forth stubble; your breath is fire which shall
devour you; and peoples shall become (as if) burned tc
lime, thorns cut off, which are kindled with fire.

13 Hear, ye that are far off, what I have done; and

acknowledge, ye that are near, my might.

® Here the strain becomes lyri-
cal; in one verse we have asson-
ance, personification, and even the
‘pathetic fallacy.’ Lebanon] i.e.
the Lebanon range of mountains
(120 iniles in length). Sharon|
‘The Sharon, i.e, the lowland
plain which extends from Carmel
on the north to below Joppa on the
south. Bashan and Carmel]
The oaks of Bashan, and the ‘ deep
jungles of copse’ in the ‘rocky dells’
of Carmel are striking exceptions
to the usual barrenness of the
hills and vales of Palestine. Hence
used as types of beauty and sub-
limity, xxxv. 2, ii. 13, Zech. xi. 2,
Cant. vii. 5. Shake themselves |
It was now autumn ; comp. /.C.A.,
p. 98.

10 This is the very moment for
which Jehovah has been waiting.
Now will & rise, viz. from my
heavenly throne, comp. xviii. 4.

" Ye conceive hay] i.e., if ye
cherish plans which are as futile as
dried grass, Ye shall bring forth
stubble, i.e., the result shall be no
more lasting than stubble. A sug-
gestive image, supplemented in the
next clause. ‘In the great scarcity
of wood for fuel throughout the
East, the famnoor, or oven, is usu-
ally heated with stubble or chaff.’
Breath] i.e., fury, as xxv. 4;
comp. Ps. x. 5, xii. 5. For the figure
of fire, comp.i. 31, ix. 18. Similarly
in xxx. 28, the breath of a furious
man is compared to a torrent.

22 Peoples] See on v. 3.

18 The prophet changes his point
of view. He has been hitherto

4 The sinners are

working with the reproductive
imagination, writing as he remem-
bers that he spoke during the
crisis, though not, perhaps, without
notes of discourses actually de-
livered. In this verse he places
himself in the historical present,
when the ‘might’ of Jehovah has
been victoriously displayed, and
calls on all nations to recognise
the far-reaching importance of Je-
hovah’s wonderful work. For it
shows who is the only God worthy
of the name.

4 Now (returning to the past)
the once unbelieving Jews begin to
‘understand’ the ‘ Tidings’ of the
prophet ; but it is ‘purely a terror’
(xxviii. 19). For it was not merely
the Assyrians on whom Isaiah pro-
nounced God’s judgment, but the
immoral and irreligious Israelites.
Isaiah’s policy of repetition (xxviii.
10) justifies itself by the result.
Even unbelievers cannot forget his
constant reference to the awful fire
of Jehovah’s wrath (comp. xxxi. 9),
of which their sins have furnished
the fuel (v. 11)———Oh, who can
tarry ... ] Lit., sojourn, as Ps.
xv. 1). ‘Who can dwell safely in
the neighbourhood of the avenging
God?’ For only he who willingly
yields himself to be God’s organ
can abide those flames (comp.
Moses at the burning bush, Ex. ili.
2, and see on x. 17, xxx. 27). ‘Per-
petual burnings,’ not with reference
to the eternity of the punishment
(comp. on Ixvi. 24), but because
the fire of Jehovah’s self-manifest-
ing love and wrath is, like him-

ISATAH. [CHAP. XXXII.

192
horror-stricken in Zion, shuddering seizcth the profane: ‘Oh,
who can tarry with devouring fire? oh, who can tarry with
perpetual burnings?’ | He who walketh in perfect righteous-
ness, and speaketh uprightness ; he who rejecteth the gain of
oppressions, who shaketh his hands not to hold bribes, who
stoppeth his ear not to hear of bloodshed, and closeth his eyes
not to look on evil; he shall inhabit heights, fortresses of
rocks shall be his place of security ; his bread is continually
given him, his water faileth not. ' The king in his beauty
shall thine eyes behold; they shall see a land of distances,
'8 Thy heart shall meditate on the terror: ‘Where is he who
registered ? where, he who weighed? where, he who counted

the towers?’

self, eternal. There is a good ana-
logy in the perpetual fire on the
altar of burnt-offering (Lev. vi. 13,
Hebr. 6). That the ‘ fire’ is sym-
bolical, is evident from the next
verse, containing what is practically
the prophet’s answer to the question
of the unbelievers.

16 ynhabit heights] Instead of
saying that the pious man can joy-
fully exist in the light of this fire
(comp. iv. 5), he introduces a new
figure of inaccessible rocky heights.
The picture of the righteous man
reminds us forcibly of Ps. xv., also
of Ps. xxiv. 3, 4. ——His bread... |
The promise goes beyond that in
xxx. 20, for it is implied that the
bread and the water should not be
‘in scant measure.” Both come
from an inexhaustible store (comp.
Jer. xv. 18). We are already in
the atmosphere of the Messianic
age. Still more evidently is this
the case in v. 17.

‘7 phe king in his beauty] Not
Jehovah (Targ., Vitr., Hend.), in
spite of v. 22, for the word ‘ beauty’
is never (except once in a doubtful
passage, Zech. ix. 17) applied to
God, but Hezekiah (comp. xxxii.
1), not, however, as a type of the
Messiah (as Caly., &c.), for there is
not a vestige of a personally Mes-
sianic reference in the rest of the
chapter, but simply as the reigning
king of Judah, The ‘beauty’ spoken
of is not that of state-robes (Knob.),

'2The barbarous people thou shalt not see—

nor that of recovered health after
Hezekiah’s_ well-known illness
(Hitz.), but an ideal beauty, the
evidence of God’s extraordinary
favour (as Ps, xlv. 2). They
shall see aland of distances]i.e.,
perhaps, the boundaries of the king-
dom of Israel shall be extended as
far as the eyes can reach. A simi-
lar hope is held out in xi. 14 (Hende-
werk), and in xxvi. 15 (note the
verb) ; but the closest parallel is
Gen. xiii. 14, 15, which has been
almost overlooked. Comp. also
Mice. vii. 11, ‘in that day shall the
bound be afar off?

8 Et hec olim meminisse juva-
dit ; they shall look back on the past
(‘the terror’) as on a bad dream.
Obs., the deep impression made
by the elaborate subdivision of the
Assyrian offices. He who re-
gistered] viz. the amounts of tri-
bute to be paid. Itis the Assyrian
dupsarru Hebraized into 7fsar in
Jer. li. 27. Weighed] i.e., tested
the weight of the gold and silver
paid. Comp. Rawlinson, Azc. Mon.
1. 476. Counted the towers]
ie., made a recognizance of the
city to be besieged. A contem-
porary psalmist bids the Jews
‘count the towers’ with a different
object, viz., to convince themselves
that the city is uninjured (Ps.

xlviii. 13).
" The barbarous people]
BdpBapor. See on xxviii. 11. Not

CHAP. XXxIII.] ISAIAH. 193

the people obscure of speech, not to be heard—of a stam-
mering tongue, not to be understood. * Behold Zion, the
city of our festal assembly ! thine eyes shall see Jerusalem
(like) an easeful home, a tent that removeth not, whose pegs
are never drawn out, and none of whose cords become rent.
” But © there Jehovah shall be for us in majesty, ° (like) a
place of ° rivers and canals, broad on both hands, into which
oared galley shall never go, neither shall majestic ship pass
thereon. * For Jehovah our judge, Jehovah our governor,
Jehovah our king—he will save us. Thy ropes have be-

b The name of, Sept., Pesh., Lowth (a different vowel).
° Instead of, Ges., Hitz., Ew.

to be heard] ‘to hear’=to un-

derstand (xxxvi. 11). Comp. Slav
= ‘speaking’ (ie., intelligible to his

own people), in opposition to ‘the

dumb,’ i.e., the Germans (Pott, Dze
Ungleichheit menschlicher Rassen,
. 70).

Hh se eoail Zion] The imperative
here conveys an earnest assurance,
as xxxi. 6 (?), xxxvii. 30, and after
an optative, Ps. cxxvili. 5.
Easeful] As xxxii. 18, That
removeth (lit., migrateth) not]
The men of Jerusalem having been
threatened with deportation (xxxvi.
17). Comp. 2 Sam. vii. 10, Am.
ix. 15.

21 In majesty] Jehovah’s ‘ma-
jesty’ is no idle quality ; it is pro-
tection to his friends, and destruc-
tion to his enemies. See x. 31,
1 Sam. iv. 8, Ex. xv. 6, II.
(Like) a place. . . Ji.e., Jehovah’s
presence shall compensate for the
want of those broad streams which
protected Mesopotamian and Egyp-
tian cities (comp. Nah. iii. 8, Jer.
li. 13). Strikingly parallel is ‘Ps.
xlvi. 4 (written, possibly, by Isaiah
himself after the overthrow of Sen-
nacherib), “‘ The streams of a river
make glad the city of God,” that is,
not the fountain of Shiloah, but the
gracious influences of the Divine
presence’ (.C.A., p. 101).
Canals] Hebr. y’drim. The plural
of the word used in Genesis and
elsewhere for the Nile, and almost
certainly connected by one of the
Pentateuch writers with the Egyp-

VOL. I.

tian aur ‘river’ (especially the
Nile). Since, however, it is used
for the Tigris in Dan. xii. 5-7, for
canals in general here, and for
subterraneous passages in mines in
Job xxviii. Io, it may well be a
good Hebrew worb, if Friedr.
Del’s reference to Ass. ya’ur,
‘stream,’ should be confirmed (Pa-
radies, Pp. 312).——Mrajestic ship]
(Same epithet as above of Jeho-
vah.) In Ps, xlviii., written at the
same time as Ps. xlvi. (see above),
we meet with the ‘ breaking of the
ships of Tarshish’ (v. 7), of course
metaphorically, of the Assyrians.

” Jehovah our king] Among
the Israelites, as among the other
Semitic nations, the earthly king
(v. 17) is but the representative of
the divine. Comp. Ps. xlviii. 2.
See Riehm, Messianic Prophecy,
pp. 66, 67.

23 Thy ropes have become
loose] The Assyrian galleys were
of twokinds. The smaller had no
mast ; the larger had one mast, to
the top of which was attached a
long yard, held in its place by
ropes (Layard, JVzneveh). Zion is
addressed. In wv. 20 she was re-
presented as a tent; here as a
ship, which is a more far-fetched
image, but was suggested by wv. 21.
Assyria is like the stateliest of her
galleys; Zion’s ship can barely
creep along, but in spite of this
will gain the victory. The ordi-
nary view which explains the pas-
sage of Assyria is excluded by the

oO

ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXXIV.

194

come loose ; they cannot hold 4 upright their mast, nor keep
the ensign spread out—d/en shall the spoil of plundering be
divided in abundance; (even) the lame shall seize upona
prey. ™ And no inhabitant shall say, I am sick: the people
which dwelleth therein hath its iniquity forgiven.

4 The stand of, Vitr., Ges., Ew., Hitz., Del. (see crit. note.)

feminine pronominal suffix, which
belongs to a land or city, not to a
people. (The Assyrians are only
referred to as a people.) The
spoil of plundering] Two sy-
nonyms to express variety. — The
lame ...| Judah the Maccabee
shared the spoil with the maimed,
the orphans, &c., 2 Mace. viii. 30.
But here the lame themselves se-
cure their portion.

24 Wo inhabitant shall say, I
am sick ...] This is not to be
combined with the preceding verse,
as if it meant that the sick will for-

get their sufferings out of sympathy
with the joy of the nation. It is
rather a Messianic feature. Sin
and its punishment are to cease
together. See xxxv. 5, 6, Ixv. 20,
and comp. Mark ii. Io, 11, ‘But
that ye may know that the Son of
man hath power on earth to forgive
sins, (he saith to the sick of the
palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and
take up thy bed, and go thy way
into thine house” It is a very
far-fetched reference which Hitz.
and Knob. find to the Assyrian
plague.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

THIS prophecy is highly rhythmical, though the corruptions which dis-
figure some verses greatly hinder its appreciation. The subject is the
Divine judgment upon the world, out of which (as in Ixiii. 16) one
specially important scene is singled, the judgment upon Israel’s inveterate
foes, the Edomites. For the bitter feelings here expressed towards the
latter, comp. Ps. cxxxvil. 7, Ezek. xxv. 12, xxxv., Ob. 10-16, Mal. i. 2-5.
There are striking parallels between chaps. xxxiv., xxxv. and Zepha-
niah, and between chap. xxxiv. and parts of Jeremiah (Jer. xlvi. 3-12,
xxv., and 1, li.), which are of great critical importance. On these, and
on the relation between chaps. xxxiv. and xiii., see the dissertation of
Caspari, Zertschr. fi lutherische Theologie, 1843, Heft 2, a singular
specimen of the uselessness of facts without a sound judgment. Surely,
‘if the occurrence of parallels between Jeremiah and Isa. xl.-Ixvi. is
not a decisive argument in favour of the priority of the latter, it is not
worth while to reopen the subject on behalf of Isa. xxxiv’ (7. C. A., p.
112.) There is far more sense in the remarks devoted to this chapter in
the essay of Budde, Jahrbiicher f. deutsche 1 heologie, 1878, Heft 4.
Inquiries into the historical fulfilment of the prophecies are, gene-
rally speaking, foreign to the purpose of a commentary. It is worth
noticing, however, that the desolation which the prophet here speaks of
as future is referred to by Malachi (i. 3, note the mention of the ‘ wolves’
or ‘jackals, and comp. Isa. xiii. 22) as already past. Was Malachi
refeiring to the desolation recently wrought by the Nabatieans, when

CHAP. XXXIV.] ISAIATL

195

they occupied Edom, dropping their nomad habits, and founded the
kingdom of Arabia Petrzea? (See the writer’s comm. on Jer. xlix. 7-22.)

1 Come near, ye nations, to hear, and ye peoples, attend ;
let the earth hear, and the fulness thereof, the world and all
things that spring out of it. * For Jehovah hath indignation
against all the nations, and wrath against all their host: he
hath laid them under the ban, he hath given them over to
slaughter. *And their slain shall be cast forth, and their
carcases—the stink of them shall go up, and mountains shall
melt with their blood, and all the *hills shall rot. 4 And the
heavens shall roll up as a scroll, and all their host shall fade,
as foliage fadeth from the vine, and as fading leaves from the
fig-tree. °For my sword hath been bathed in heaven ; be-
hold, upon Edom shall it come down, and upon the people of
my ban to judgment. ® The sword of Jehovah is become full
of blood, and moistened with fat ; with the blood of lambs
and he-goats, with the kidney-fat of rams; for Jehovah hath
a sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great slaughter in the land of

® So Bi.

1 Universal nature is summoned
asa witness of the divine judgment,
as i. 2, Ps. 1. 4, &c., though, as v. 2
states, it is only humanity which is
directly concerned.

* yndignation ... wrath] It
is noteworthy that these words only
occur in the parts of Isaiah which
are of disputed authorship. See,
for the former, liv. 8, lx. 10 ; for the
latter xxvii. 4 (text doubtful), xlii.
25, li. 17, lix. 18, xiii. 3, Ixvi. 15. In
the acknowledged works of Isaiah,
“the anger of Jehovah, is the
phrase employed. All their
host] Somewhat vaguely used, as
in Gen. ii. 1. There is a special
reason for the choice of the phrase
here (see on uv. 4). Laid under
the ban] as xi. 15, xxxvii. II.

5 Mountains ...] Reversely
parallel to Am. ix. 13 (end).

‘Asascroll] A unique simile,
reminding us of the later Stoic
conception of the sky as a BiBXos
6cov, of which heavenly bodies are
the orotyeta or characters.

TEXT, host of heaven (gloss on ‘their host’ in v. 4).

5 For] ic, In fact. Or, be-
cause :— ‘ Jehovah’s sword has
sated itself in heaven, therefore, it
will now descend to earth.’ ——- wry
sword] A symbolic phrase for the
divine vengeance, for the origin of
which see on xxvii. 1. Comp. es-
pecially Deut. xxxii. 41-43, which
Drechsler thinks that our prophet
had in his mind. Been bathed]
Lit., soaked, i.e., strictly, with blood
(as in Deut. Zc. and Jer. xlvi. 10),
but here, by a bold metaphor, with
fury. The same verb (in Kal)is used
of love in Prov. vii. 18, remarks
Dr. Weir. The first objects of this
fury are the host of heaven (vz. 4).

® The perfects are those of pro-
phetic certitude. For the figures,

comp. Zeph. i. 7, Jer. xlvi. Io,
Ezek. xxxix. 17-19. Lambs...
he-goats .... rams] Animals

‘clean’ according to the Levitical
law and therefore admissible for

sacrifice. Compare the parallel
in Jer. li. go, Kidney-fat] See
Lev. iii. 4.

02

196

ISAIATI.

(CHAP. XxXxly,

Edom ; 7and wild oxen shall be struck down with them, and

bullocks together with oxen.
drunken with blood, and their dust moistened with fat.

And their land shall become
8 For

unto Jehovah belongeth a day of vengeance, and a year of
recompense for the quarrel of Zion.

®* And the torrents thereof shall turn into pitch, and its
dust into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become pitch

that burneth night and day.

10Tt shall remain unquenched

for ever, its smoke shall go up from generation to generation,

7 wild oxen] Hebr. rim.
An interesting word. Auth. Vers.
renders ‘ unicorns,’ which, however,
is clearly wrong, for in Deut. xxxiii.
17 the 7ém (singular) is said to
have horns (A. V. evades this by
misrendering ‘unicorns’). The
characteristics of the 7% in the
Old Testament are its splendid
horns ; its great size and height;
its untameableness ; and its moun-
tainous haunts.—These may sug-
gest that it is the buffalo; but this
cannot be, for 1. the wild buffalo
inhabits swamps, 2. it can betamed,
and 3. it penetrated westward from
India in comparatively recent times.
—Most modern German commen-
tators (eg., Ew., Del., Kalisch),
have thought of the oryx, or more
precisely, the Aztilope leucoryx, for
which they claim the authority of
passages in the Talmud (see Del.
on Job xxxix. 9), and the analogy
of the Arabic vim, which is now
used in Syria for the white and yel-
low gazelle. The objection is that
the oryx was confined to Arabia
and N. E. Africa, and was very
easily tamed.'—Mr. Houghton, a
zoologist as well as an Assyrian
scholar, has shown from the As-
syrian bas-reliefs and inscriptions,
that the Assyrian rtm belonged
to the genus Bos, not to that of
Bison, and as the locality specified
for the rémz by the Assyrians” is

1 See Wilkinson's Zgyptians, i. 227.

just where it ought to be from the
point of view of the Old Testament,
we may accept his decision (en-
dorsed at length, 1883, by Friedr.
Delitzsch) as to the rendering of
the Hebrew word as final, Auroch
or wild bull then is the meaning.—
Weare of course bound to account
for the divergent Arabic use of the
term, but that is easily done. This
kind of wild bull is now extinct,
and the oryx, from its size and
general aspect, is the natural legatee
of its name. Be struck down]
Lit., go down. Comp. Jer. 1. 27,
li. 40, also xlviii. 15. Naeg. denies
that the word has quite the same
shade of meaning as there, but
why? The Hebr. yavad lattabhakh
surely means ‘to be felled unto (so
as to fall into) the slaughtering-
trough. Wild oxen ... bul-
locks .. . oxen] i.e., the chiefs of
the Edomites, as opposed to the
small cattle or the people (v. 6).

8 See Ixiii. 4, and comp. lxi. 2,
significant parallels for students
of the critical controversy.

% 10 The figures are suggested
partly by the volcanic phenomena
of Idumzea, and partly by its prox-
imity to the site of Sodom and
Gomorrah (see Jer. xlix. 18) ; imi-
tated in Rev. xiv. 10, II, xix. 3.—
The eternity of the desolation is
four times asserted. This may
fairly be adduced as a subsidiary

2 On the broken obelisk attributed to Assur-nacir-pal, 477 are said to exist ‘oppo-
site the land of the Khatti, and at the foot of I.ebanon;’ see Houghton, 7.S.B.A.
v. 336-340. (Mr. Houghton's priority has escaped the notice of German scholars. His
paper in 7..S,.8.A. is dated June 1877, and the substance of it was partly printed in
the Bible Educator previously. But why compete about such trifles? Comp. Hommel,
Die semit. Volker u. Sprachen, p. 497-)

CHAP. XXXIV] ISAIAH. 197

it shall lie waste unto all eternity, there shall be none pass-
ing through it. 1! And the pelican and the hedgehog shall
take possession thereof; the eagle-owl and the raven shall
dwell therein ; and he shall stretch out upon it the line of
chaos, and the plummet of desolation. 1!*Its nobles [shall
come to nothing], and none shall be there whom they might
call to the kingdom,* and all Edom’s princes shall be no
more. 'And its castles shall spring up in thorns: nettles
and thistles shall be in its fortresses ; and it shall become a
settlement of jackals, and an enclosure for ostriches. '4 And
wild cats shall meet hyzenas, and one satyr shall call to the
other ; surely there shall the night-hag repose, and find for

8 So Sept., Bii—Hebr. text, As for its nobles, none shall be there to proclaim the
kingdom (Ges., Ew., Naeg.) ; or, . . . whom they might call to the kingdom (Vitr.,
Hitz.) ; or, As for its nobles, no kingdom shall be there which they might proclaim
(Del. ).—They shall call the nobles of the kingdom, but there shall be none there, Weir

(by a transposition).

argument for the eschatological
reference of the chapter :—by itself
it would be insufficient to prove it.
The fall of Edom coincides with the
fall of the whole antitheistic world.

i-17 A fresh series of images, in-
consistent, strictly speaking, with
the foregoing. Comp. xiii, 20-22,
xiv. 23, Zeph. ii. 14.

The eagle-owl] ‘A mag-
nificent species inhabiting ruins
and caves in every part of Pales-
tine’ (Houghton). —He shall
stretch out . The same
image in Am. vii. 7-9. The work
of destruction is to be carried out
with the same thoroughness as that
of building. The subject of the
verb is Jehovah._—-Chaos.....
desolation] Hebr. “haz...
bhi, the two words which together
express the idea of chaos, Gen. i.
2, comp. Jer. iv. 23.

2 Its nobles .. . kingdom]
It is inferred from this passage and
from Gen. xxxvi. 31-43, that Edom
was under an elective monarchy,
the electors being the chiefs of the
tribes. The text-reading is harsh,
but gives the same sense; ‘the
kingdom’ in this case means the
newly elected king.

18 an enclosure] The rendering
‘grass’ will not suit the mention of
‘ostriches,’ which do not eat grass.

14 wild cats. ..bhyzenas...
satyr] See on xiii. 21, 22. ‘The
night-hag] So Milton, Pav. Lost,
ii. 262; Hebr. th. Another
popular superstition, analogous to
that of the ‘a/#zkah or vampire (?) of
Prov. xxx. 15 (comp. Targ. of Ps. xii.
g), and still more exactly corre-
sponding to that of the ///a and
lilit of the Babylonians and As-
syrians, these being names of male
and female demons who were
thought to persecute men and
women in their sleep.1_ Mixed with
Persian elements it existed among
the Jews of Mesopotamia as late
as the seventh century A.D. (Levy,
Z. D. M. G., ix. 461-491.) The
Rabbinical stories about Lilith
may be found in Buxtorf (Ler
Talm., s. v.). She was said to
have been Adam’s first wife, who
flew away from him (comp. the
Greek myth of Lamia), and became
a demon. Her passion was, like
that of Lamia and the Strige, to
murder young’ children.—Goethe’s
version of the story, in the Wal-
purgis night-scene of Faust, is

1 Lenormant, La magie chez les Chaldéens, p. 36; Hommel, Die semitischen
Volker und Sprachen, i. 367 (when an Accadian list of demons is quoted).

198 ISAIAH. [CHAP. Xxxv.

herself a resting-place. ' There shall the arrow-snake make
its nest, and hatch, and lay, and gather within her shadow ;
surely there shall the vultures assemble, "none shall lack his
fellow. '©°Seek ye out from the scroll of Jehovah and
read®; not one of these is missing, for 4the mouth of
[Jehovah] ¢ it hath commanded, and his breath hath brought
them together. '’ And /e hath cast the lot for them, and his
hand hath divided it unto them with the line: for ever shall
they possess it, generation after generation shall they dwell
therein,

>So Bi,, restoring the verb from v, 16, where the whole phrase is found, but where
it is not wanted.

© According to their number Jehovah calleth them, Knob, Kuenen. (These critics
read ‘they seek’ for ‘seek ye out,’ andattach it to the preceding verse. So, too, Sept.,
continuing in v. 16: ‘ By number they passed by.’)

4 So Bi ; TEXT might mean ‘my mouth,’—Sept. has simply, the Lorp; a few

Heb. MSS., Pesh., Ew., his mouth.

therefore not strictly accurate. The
Targum of Job i. 15 gives a new
and enigmatical turn to the story ;
‘Sheba’ (A. V. Sabeans) it ren-
ders by ‘Lilith, Queen of Zemar-
gad’ (=smaragd), identifying the
wise Queen of Sheba with the
Queen of the demons! See Gratz’s
Monatsschrift, 1870, pp. 187-9.)

16 Seek ye out from the book
of Jehovah ] ie, when the
time of fulfilment has come, refer
to the prophecy, and see how
exactly all its details have been
realised. The advice and the
phraseology are equally remark-
able. The advice, because it re-
minds us so much of the Scripture-
searching of the post-exile Jews,
(comp. Dan. ix. 2) ; the phraseology,
because ‘the scroll of Jehovah’
may plausibly be taken to imply
the existence of a prophetic canon.
A single prophecy might, no
doubt, be called ‘a scroll’ (xxx. 8,
Jer. li. 60), but the form of the
phrase, ‘scroll of Jehovah, points

to something more—either to a
collection of Isaianic prophecies,
in which this was included, or a
collection of various prophetic
writings—in fact,a prophetic canon
—in which a book of Isaiah was
contained. The former view is,
perhaps, easier than the latter.—
The Sept. has a very singular
rendering of this verse, which has
given Knobel a basis for recon-
structing the text. That a verb has
fallen out at the end of vw. 15 is
not improbable, but his objection to
v.16 seems ultimately to depend
on his opinion as to the date of the
prophecy. Tome the text of v. 15
wears all the appearance of genuine-
ness. Kuenen, a high authority,
thinks otherwise ; but is he not
unconsciously prejudiced by his
views as to the formation of the
canon? See his A/¢storisch-kritisch
Ondersock, iii. 399 (in section on
the collection of the Old Test.
books). The Sept. at any rate gives
avery meagre first clause in v. 16.

CHAPTER XXXV.

THIS is a description, not of the joyous return of the Jewish exiles from
Babylonia (an inveterate error which I fear will not soon be eradicated),
but of the glorious condition of Israel after the Return, which the

ISAIAH. 199
prophet involuntarily identifies with the Messianic age. The details of
the description are partly to be taken literally, partly symbolically (see
on xl. 11, xli, 18, lv. 12, 13). A transformation of the natural world is
to accompany that of the spiritual (see on xxxii. 15, 16). The return
spoken of in the last verse is that of the Jews who remained in dispersion
even after the Return from Babylonia.

This is, I think, the only explanation which does justice to the group
of prophecies of which chap. xxxv. forms a part (see on xl. 11, xli. 18, lv.
12, 13).

Is this prophecy to be connected with the foregoing one? The pro-
noun-suffix of the verb in v. 1 is purely imaginary (see Del.’s note), and
the chapter is perfectly intelligible by itself. On the other hand, xxxv. 7
evidently alludes to xxxiv. 13, and parallels to Zephaniah occur in both

CHAP. XXXxv.]

chapters.

There is also a suitableness in the juxtaposition of the pro-

phecies ; it produces a fine contrast, though the transition is abrupt. In
short, there is a connection, though not quite so close a one as some have
supposed. The case is rather like that of xvii, 12-14 and xvill.

'The wilderness and the parched land shall rejoice, and
the desert shall exult and burst forth like the * narcissus, ? burst
forth and exult, yea, exult and ring out a cry. Lebanon’s

4 Meadow-saffron, Pesh. (the word is the same as in Hebrew).

1 The desert] See on xxxii. 15.
Rutgers (De echtheid van het
tweede gedeelte van Jesata, p. 171)
has well pointed out the inconsis-
tency of taking the ‘blind’ and the
‘deaf’? symbolically (v. 5), and the
‘parched land’ and ‘the desert’
literally — ike the narcissus]
Like the beautiful white narcissus,
so common in spring in the plain
of Sharon (Conder, Pal. Fund
Statement, 1878, p. 46). In Cant.
ii. 1 we find this flower coupled
with the (white or dark violet) lily.
Both plants indicate a natural fer-
tility of soil and abundant moisture.
The claims of the rendering ‘nar-
cissus’ were exhaustively set forth
by Mr. Houghton in the Dict. of the
Lible. Since then Friedr. Del. has
proved that the original meaning of
khabhagceleth is a certain marsh-
plant, probably (as Prof. Sayce and
Mr. Houghton have pointed out to
me) the Cyserus syriacus, which
ornaments several marshy districts
in Palestine, and especially the
jungly Nahr el-Aujeh in the Plain
of Sharon. This plant is allied to
and equally graceful with the Cy-

See crit. note.

perus papyrus, whose tall stem and
bushy crown of threadlike flower-
ing branchlets visitors to Sicily
never fail to admire. To render
here ‘like the papyrus’ would com-
mend itself to those who have seen
this plant, and the comparison
would not inappropriately precede
the more glowing phraseology of
v. 2. Before ‘the glory of Lebanon
and Sharon’ can appear, the dry
desert-soil must be moistened. The
objections which strike me as most
important are, 1. that reeds are
generally emblems of instability
and weakness, and 2. that the
flowers of Canticles are spring-
flowers, whereas the Cyferus pa-
pyrus and its allies do not flower
till towards the end of autumn.

2 The fairest parts of the Holy
Land shall, as it were, share their
beauty with less favoured districts.
‘The Carmel’ and ‘the Sharon’
are mentioned together, not merely
because both are beautiful districts,
but because they adjoin each other
(see On xxxiii. 9).——The glory of
Jehovah] i.e., the manifestation of
his creative power.

200 ISAIAIT. [CHAP. XXXv.

glory shall be given unto it, the splendour of Carmel and
Sharon ; these shall see the glory of Jehovah, the splendour
of our God.— Strengthen ye the slack hands, and make firm
the tottering knees: *say unto those that are of a ° fearful
heart, ‘ Be strong, fear not.’ Behold, ‘your God [cometh],
vengeance [for his people shall he take] ; a divine retribution
cometh, he himself cometh to save you.—* Then shall the
eyes of the blind be opened, and the ears of the deaf un-
stopped: ®then shall the lame man leap as the hart, and the
tongue of the dumb ring out acry. For waters shall break
out in the wilderness, and torrents in the desert,’ and the
mirage shall become a lake, and the thirsty land springs of
water.—In the settlement of the jackals * * * shall be
its place to lie down ; the enclosure [of the ostriches shall be]
for reeds and rushes. * And a raised way shall be there, and
it shall be called, The holy way ; that which is unclean shall
not pass over it, 4[and * * walking in the way,] and4
fools shall not go astray.—® No lion shall be there, neither
shall the most violent of beasts go up thereon; but the

> Lit., hasty (comp, xxxii. 4).

¢So Bi.—TEXT, your God (even) vengeance cometh, a retribution of God.
(Rhythm and syntax require the restoration. )

4 Lit., and he for them walking (sing.) in the way, and.—And since he goeth on
the way for them, Ew.—Since it is destined for them (for his people, Weir, comp. Ps.
xxviii. 8, Sept.) ; whosoever walketh in the way, Del., Naeg. (Omitted by Bi. ; see
crit. note. )

3 The slack hands and tottering
knees are evidently figurative (see
next verse). The prophet gene-
rally, if not always, gives us a hint
when we are zof to interpret his
descriptions literally.

% 6 Comp. xxxiii, 23, 24, and the
symbolical language of xxxil. 3, 4.
It is singular that the removal of
human infirmities should occupy so
small a portion of the Messianic
descriptions in comparison with the
‘restitution’ of external nature. It
could not, of course, be omitted
altogether. For waters. . |
Comp. xliil. 20, Ps. evii. 35.

7 The mirage... ] The phan-
tom-lake which so often deludes
the caravans shall give place to the
reality,—a noble image (comp. lv.
2)! The sarab or mirage is only
once again referred to (xlix, 10), In
Arabic literature, naturally enough,

it appears frequently ; comp. Koran,
Xxiv. 39. In the settlement of
the jackals] The driest places shall
be covered with vegetation.

5 a raised way] How it is to be
produced, we need not ask:—the
whole atmosphere of the prophecy
is supernatural. See xlix. 11, and
note on xl. 3. The purpose of the
highway is more liable to dispute.
Most think it is for the returning
exiles. Rather it is a road for
pilgrims to the house of Jehovah
(comp. xix. 23). Hence as Naeg.
well observes, the emphasis laid on
the sacred character of the persons
or objects passing over it.——That
which is unclean is surely not to
be limited (Knob.) to the heathen.
Not all Jews are admitted to the
Messianic blessings, and not all
heathen are excluded from them,
is the doctrine of this group of

CHAP, XXXVI.] ISATAII. 201

released shall walk there, °and the freed ones of Jehovah
shall return. And they shall come to Zion with a ringing
sound, and everlasting joy shall be upon their head ; they
shall overtake gladness and joy, trouble and sighing shall flee

away.

prophecies. Comp. xliv. 5, Ixvi. 3.
Still there is probably an allusion
to the forced entrances of heathen
invaders of Judah, as in Joel iii. 17.
After this comes a clause of which
I cannot give a satisfactory expla-
nation, Neither Ew. nor Del. can
make the words ‘for them’ seem
natural. Dr Weir’s correction is
easy, but the errors of the text
probably go further. There is a
family likeness in corrupt passages.
The released shall walk
there] Released from all trouble,
and fear of trouble, the cleansed
Israelites (not perhaps excluding
Gentiles) shall walk unmolested to
and from the house of Jehovah.
Comp. on lv. 12. ‘Released,’ Hebr.
gulim, occurs again only li. 10,
Ixii. 12 (comp. Ixili. 4), Ps. evii. 2 5
‘freed’ (v. 10), P’diyim, only li. 11.

10 Parallel phrases in xi. 7, li. 3
(seealso onli. 11), The freed ones

of Jehovah shall return... ]
Drechsler thinks that these are not
the same persons as those men-
tioned in the last verse. According
to him, ‘the released’ in v. 9 are
the remnant of the population of
Judah which has not perished in
the judgments; the ‘freed’ in
v. 10 are those brought back from
exile. He is partly right, for the
‘return’ spoken of in v. 10 has
nothing to do with the highway of
v. 8. But whether it points back-
ward to the great Return from
Babylon, or forward to the restora-
tion of the many Jews who were
still dispersed among the Gentiles
(comp. Neh. v. 8), seems to me
uncertain. Joy... upontheir
head] So, ‘ Thou hast crowned him
with glory and honour’ (Ps. viii. 5).
They shall overtake... |
viz., that which they have so long
pursued in vain.

CHAPTERS XXXVI.-XXXIX.
GENERAL HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.

THE decipherment of the Assyrian inscriptions, which has thrown so
much light on the undisputed works of the prophet Isaiah, has but
revealed fresh difficulties in the mixture of prophecy and historic tradition
before us. The principal of these arises from the newly-discovered fact
that whereas, according to the Assyrian sponym Canon, Sennacherib
only came to the throne in 705 B.c., the Old Testament (2 Kings and
‘Isaiah’) places his campaign against Judah as far back as 711. In
this latter year, according to the Assyrian Canon, Sargon was still
reigning ; and though the same high authority admits an invasion of
Judah by Sennacherib, it is as Sennacherib’s third campaign, in the year
701, that the Canon and the royal inscriptions represent it. Hence a
growing conviction on the part of Old Testament scholars that there must
have been some misunderstanding on the part of the latest editor of the
Hebrew traditions. ‘The /east change’—these are the words of Sir

202 ISAIAH. (CHAP. XXXVI.

Henry Rawlinson in 1858—‘is to substitute in the 13th verse of 2 Kings
xvill, [=Isa. xxxvi. 1] the ¢wenty-seventh for the “fourteenth” year of
Hezekiah. We may suppose the error to have arisen from a correction
made by a transcriber who regarded the invasion of Sennacherib and the
illness of Hezekiah (which last was certainly in his fourteenth year) as
synchronous, whereas the words “ in those days ” were in fact used with a
good deal of latitude by the sacred writers... If this view be taken,
the second expedition [of Sennacherib against Judah] must have followed
the first within one or at most two years, for Hezekiah reigned in all only
29 years.’ !

This, however, is a hypothesis of exceptional boldness, and is not only
contradicted by the absolute silence of Sennacherib’s inscriptions as to a
second Syrian campaign, but, as Prof. Birks remarks, ‘seems disproved
by almost every verse of the Biblical narrative’? It is to the sagacious
genius of the lamented Irish scholar, Dr. Edward Hincks, that the solu-
tion of the chronological problem is in all likelihood due. In a learned
paper on this and similar difficulties he states that it seems to him ‘as if
a displacement of a portion of the text had taken place, and as if the
verses preceding and following the passage displaced had been thrown
into one. The text, as it originally stood, was probably to this effect :
‘“Now in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah, the king of Assyria
came up (2 Kings xviii. 13). In those days was king Hezekiah sick unto
death, &c. (xx. 1-19). And Sennacherib, king of Assyria, came up against
all the fenced cities of Judah, and took them (xviii. 13 4-xix. 37).” In the
fourteenth year of Hezekiah, Sargon actually went to Palestine, as his
annals of the tenth year show; but they mention no conquests made from
Hezekiah. His only act of hostility seems to have been the conquest of
Asdud, and he seems to have been chiefly occupied with visiting mines,
among which is specified the great copper mine of Baalzephon, probably
Sarabut-el-Kadim, in the Sinaitic peninsula. In the following year,
Merodach Baladan was still in possession of Babylon ; but being appre-
hensive of an attack from Sargon, he would be likely to look about for
assistance. Hence his embassy to Hezekiah.

‘If, then, the Hebrew text originally stood as is above supposed, it
would be in perfect harmony with the contemporary records of Assyria ;
whereas, if the fourteenth year of Hezekiah be equalled to the third year
of Sennacherib, in which that monarch places his expedition against
Hezekiah, it is utterly impossible to reconcile with Scripture the capture
of Samaria, which was in the sixth year of Hezekiah, and nineteen years
previous to the expedition.’ §

1 Prof. Rawlinson, Herodotus, first ed. (Lond, 1858) i. 479. Either this or the
next mentioned hypothesis is more probable than that of Naeg. and Del., who suppose
that the opening words of chap. xxxvi. belong properly to the narratives forming
chaps. xxxviii., xxxix. This involves cutting out the existing introductory formule of
those chapters, and leaves the story of the invasion without a date, See also at the
end of introd. to chap. xxxviii.

2 Birks, Commentary on the book of Isaiah (Lond. 1878), p. 377. Mr. Birks gives
a list of not less than twenty reasons against Sir H. Rawlinson’'s hypothesis.

3 Hincks, ‘On the Rectifications of Sacred and Profane Chronology, &c.,’ in the
Yournal of Sacred Literature, Oct. 1858, p. 136.

CHAP. XXXxV1.] ISAIAH. 203

There is only one inaccuracy in this lucidly-stated hypothesis. Dr.
Hincks supposes that the cuneiform inscriptions are silent as to the
achievements of Sargon in Judah ; but, as we have already found (see on
a. 5-xii. 6), this is not the case. His principal point, however, is (so far
as I can see) unassailable, viz. that the latest editor of the Hebrew tra-
ditions confounded two invasions which were really separated by an
interval of ten years '—that of Sargon in 711, and that of Sennacherib in
7o1. The hypothesis of Dr. Hincks (which appears to have attracted
very little attention at the time) has since been proposed anew by other
scholars, especially Mr. Sayce and H. Brandes. The former, in January
1873, contributed to the Zheological Review a ‘ Critical Examination of
Isaiah xxxvi.-xxxix. on the Basis of recent Assyrian Discoveries,’ to which
I have already acknowledged my obligations for the discovery of the sub-
jugation of the kingdom of Judah by Sargon. No Old Testament scholar
will fail to admire the acuteness and ingenuity which this essay displays.
The discovery which gives it its chief value (divined, but not proved, by
Dr. Hincks) pours a flood of light on a whole group of Isaianic pro-
phecies. One cannot, however, help regretting the adventurous character
of a part both of the exegesis and of the literary analysis. Even Dr.
Kuenen, in speaking of the latter with that reserve which characterises
all his literary judgments, makes no secret of his opinion that this well-
meant attempt ‘does not seem to have been successful.’ ?

The hypothesis of H. Brandes* does not require such a great disturb-
ance of the Hebrew text as that proposed by Mr. Sayce. The fact that
in 2 Kings xviii. 14-16 the form of the name Hezekiah is not AAzzkiyyahi
as in v. 17 and the following narrative, but A/Adzhiyyah, of itself shows
that these verses at any rate proceed from a different source,’ and a dim
consciousness of the fact seems to have led to the space in our Hebrew
Bibles between v. 16 and v. 17. Internal evidence is no less strongly in
favour of disintegration. Both the form andthe contents of v. 17 separate
it from that which precedes. After Hezekiah had sent tribute,* what
could justify the Assyrian king in sending an army to Jerusalem? Again,

1 He has also, as we shall see, shortened history by twenty years in xxxvii. 7.

2? Kuenen, Zhe Prophets and Prophecy in Israel, p. 289. Dr. Kuenen continues
with the remark that Mr. Sayce’s essay ‘has shown still more clearly than before that
the [Hebrew] narrative contains data mutually conflicting, and leaves more than one
guestion unsolved.’ For my own part, I agree to some extent with Mr. Sayce, viz.
that points of contact with the invasion of Sargon can be traced even after 2 Kings
xviii. 17 ; certainly there is one in v. 34 0f the same chapter. But a redistribution of
the historical material into a Sargon-document and a ‘primary’ and a ‘secondary’
Sennacherib-document seems to me impossible.

5 Brandes, Abhundlungen zur Geschichte des Orients (Halle, 1874), p. 81, &c. ;
comp. Kleinert, Theol. Studien und Kritiken, xlvi. (1877), 174, &c.

4 Kuenen (Ozderzoek, i. 269, 270), Wellhausen (Bleek’s Linlectung in das A.T.,
ed. 4, p. 255), and Nowack (‘ Remarks on the rq4th year of Hezekiah’ in Theol. Stud.
u, Krit, 1881, p. 300, &c.) fully admit this. The former thinks that the narratives
relate to two different stages of the same campaign (against which see Schrader,
K.A.T., ed. 2, p. 306) ; the latter that they give two independent reports of the same
events. Floigl agrees with Nowack, but thinks that the elaborate cycle of narratives
in 2 Kings xviii. 17-xx. 19 is thoroughly legendary, like the cycles relative to Elijah
and Elisha (Die Chronologie der Bibel, 1880, pp. 29, 30).

5 It is noteworthy that in 2 Chron. xxxii. nothing is said of Hezekiah’s tribute, but
much of his preparations for defence. Here, too, the fourteenth year is not specified as
the date of the invasion. It is a remark of Dr. Brandes.

204 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXXVI.

if the mission of the Tartan and the Rab-shakeh had taken place in the
fourteenth year of Hezekiah, the latter would certainly have accused
Hezekiah of complicity with Babylon (comp. chap. xxxix.), and not with
Egypt. But all becomes clear if we assign the events of the section be-
ginning at 2 Kings xviii. 17 to 702 B.C., in the spring of which year the
third year of Sennacherib officially opened. Babylon had fallen in 710,
and Egypt alone remained to be crushed by Assyria. The accusation
brought against Hezekiah of having a secret understanding with Egypt
is now perfectly intelligible.

My view, then, is briefly this, reserving an answer to objections for
Essay II. in the second volume. The events related in 2 Kings xviii. 14-16
belong to an account of Sargon’s invasion of Judah, and the opening
words of v. 13 seem to me (following Hincks) to presuppose a fragmentary
introduction of this account, which was worked up by the compiler of
Kings during the Exile, together with the opening words of the more
elaborate account of Sennacherib’s. Such a ‘working-up’ is in agreement
with what we know of the procedure of the writer of Kings elsewhere :—
he is not an original writer, but a compiler, and not always what we should
call a critical compiler. He knew even less of Sargon than the compiler
of Ezra iv. (see v. 10, ‘Asnapper’) knew of Assurbanipal, and had not the
critical caution to put aside a fragmentary document which he did not
understand.

Before passing on to Dr. Hincks’s second point, an answer seems due
to the objection that to put Sennacherib’s invasion in the twenty-seventh
(twenty-fourth ?) year of Hezekiah makes the persecution of the prophets
under Manasseh extremely difficult to realise. Would not so great an
interposition of Jehovah, so striking a fulfilment of Isaiah’s assurances in
His name, give an impulse to the worship of the true God with which the
polytheistic party would find it hopeless to contend? And does it not
seem to destroy the distinctive character of the event as a turning-point
in Israel’s history hardly second to the Exodus, if we admit that it was
followed so closely by the accession of the renegade Manasseh ?—The
objections well deserve consideration, but do not appear to me insuperable.
First I reply, that the members of the polytheistic party would be sure
to ascribe the glory of the removal of the invaders to the gods they them-
selves worshipped, just as the Egyptians ascribed it to the Creator, Ptah.
The writings of Isaiah give us no reason to suppose that he exerted
any deep spiritual influence ; he seems to have been one of those who
‘toil all the night, but take nothing.’ Contempt and ridicule were the lot
of the prophets of Jehovah (xxviii. 9, 10, 22), and there were times in
Isaiah’s experience (so I think we may infer from xxx. 20) when they even
had to ‘conceal themselves’ or ‘withdraw into a corner. Next, it is
surely too much to say that the deliverance from Sennacherib is deprived
of its religious importance by the close neighbourhood of Manasseh’s
persecution. The divine ‘election’ of Israel was not dependent on the
character of its kings, and it was as important for the church-nation of
Jehovah to be saved from destruction in Hezekiah’s twenty-seventh year
as in his fourteenth.

CHAP, Xxxv1.] ISAIAH. 205

On the second point the transposition of the account of Hezekiah’s
illness—a long argument is clearly unnecessary. The promise of fifteen
years more of life to Hezekiah compels us to place his illness in the

- fourteenth year of his reign (comp. 2 Kings xviii. 2), which is the year of
the invasion of Judah, not by Sennacherib, but by Sargon. Besides this,
the embassy of Merodach Baladan to Hezekiah, related in chap. xxxix.,
can only be adequately accounted for on the supposition that it had a
principal reference to this impending invasion. For twelve years, says
the Canon of Ptolemy, in harmony with the Assyrian inscriptions, Mero-
dach Baladan, the successful rebel against Assyria, reigned over Baby-
lonia. The twelve years extend from 721 to 710, i.e., to the sixteenth?
year of Hezekiah, During this period Merodach Baladan might at any
moment expect hostilities from Assyria, and he therefore set himself to
form as strong a coalition as possible of those who like himself were
threatened by that ambitious power. ‘ Against the will of the gods, says
Sargon in his Annals, ‘ . . he had sent during twelve years ambassadors.’ ?
We may reasonably place the embassy to Hezekiah in 713 or 712. Atany
rate, chaps. xxxviii., xxxix. ought chronologically to precede chap. xxxvi.

The Assyrian account of this great period (great to believers in the
‘election’ of Israel, not to the Assyrian annalists) is accessible to all in
English, French, and German translations. It is extant in three (more
strictly, in four) forms, only differing in their greater or less minuteness,
which are found respectively in the inscriptions on the Taylor cylinder
and on the Kouyunjik bulls, and in the text of another cylinder (very
similar to the Taylor), translated by Mr. George Smith. Before, how-
ever, drawing the reader’s attention to the peculiar features of the Assyrian
account, it will be well to give a short historical summary of the events
connected with the invasion of Judah by Sennacherib.

In 705, according to the Assyrian Canon, Sargon was murdered in his
new and richly adorned palace of Dir-Sarrukin (now Khorsabad), about
ten miles from Nineveh. He was succeeded by a younger son, the famous
Sennacherib, who, though inferior in political talent to his father, seems
to have made a deeper impression on the Jewish mind. He may be
taken, according to Mr. George Smith, ‘as the typical Eastern monarch:
all the vices of pride and arrogance, cruelty and lust of power, so con-
spicuous in Oriental sovereigns, were developed to excess in him ..
His military expeditions were on a grand scale, but more designed for
show than real conquest. His greatest efforts sometimes bore no fruit,
or only ended in disaster. He had no genius for conciliating the peoples
he conquered, and his process for putting an end to revolt is shown by

1 Weare not, I think, tied up to the literal acceptance of the scheme of chronology
to which 2 Kings xviii. 2 belongs. This, as the leading critics agree, is a later addition
to the Hebrew narratives. a RL, Vil, at,

5 For the Taylor cylinder, see &.P., i. 33 &c. ; for the Bull Inscriptions, 2327 vii. 57
&c. Readers of German will do better to consult Schrader’s extracts and translations,
K.A.T., pp. 288-294, and 301-304. For Smith's text (translated), see his Assyrian
Discoveries, pp. 296-308. The fourth Assyrian document is a cylinder-inscription,
which may be called Mitunu’s, as it is dated in the year of his eponomy or archonship.
This has, however, not appeared in a translation. Prof. Schrader informs me that it
‘contains nothing particularly new.’ But it has an importance of its own (see note on
the following page).

206 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXXVI.

the ruin he inflicted on Babylon.’! It was, however, a most difficult task
which fell to him,—that of the pacification of the Assyrian empire, stirred
to its furthest extremities by the news of the murder of Sargon. The
foremost of the rebel-chiefs was the sworn foe of Assyria, Merodach
Baladan, who emerged from his place of concealment, and once more
assumed the Babylonian crown. It was a fruitless effort; Babylon
was again captured by the Assyrians, though her champion, with
characteristic good fortune, made good his escape. On his return
from Babylon, Sennacherib laid his iron hand on the Aramean tribes of
the middle Euphrates district. He says himself, on the Bellino cylinder,
‘208,000 men and women, 7,200 horses, wild asses, asses, 5,330 camels,
70,200 oxen, 800,600 small cattle, a large booty, I carried away to Assyria.’?

Meantime, the kings and chiefs of Phoenicia and Palestine had not
been idle. The people of Ekron, for instance, had deposed their king
Vadi, a nominee of Assyria, and sent him in chains to Jerusalem. So
Sennacherib himself informs us,’ and the fact is significant, as the im-
prisonment of a vassal of Assyria was an overt act of rebellion on the
part of Hezekiah, Egypt too had been stirred by the news of the opposi-
tion encountered by Sennacherib in various quarters. It seemed a time
for clearing off old scores. The active support of Shabataka, the energetic
king of Ethiopia, was acquired. ‘The people, terrible ever since it arose,
the strong, strong nation and all-subduing,’ is addressed in imaginative,
dramatic style by the poet-prophet Isaiah, who evidently appreciates the
noble qualities of the subjects of Shabataka. How the Ethiopian empire
prepared to meet the foe, and how the spokesman of Jehovah courteously
but decisively repels their assistance, we have already seen in commenting
upon chap- xviii.

It was in the spring of 701 * (‘my third campaign’) that Sennacherib,
with the deliberateness of conscious strength, condescended to measure
himself with the enemies on the west of his empire. Of this period we
have, as the reader is aware, a contemporary Assyrian as well as a late
Hebrew account, and it is a disputed question how far these two narra-
tives fairly admit of being harmonised. The following combination of
facts seems to the writer to supply at least a probable setting for Isaiah’s
prophecies.—After reducing Sidon and the rest of the Phcenician cities,
Sennacherib marched along the coast-road in the direction of Egypt. On
his arrival at Lachish he detached a corps from his main army to bring
back Judah to its allegiance, and especially to reduce the dangerously
strong fortress of Jerusalem. The Tartan® or some inferior general
invaded the land of Judah, captured forty-six of the fortified towns (this

1 Smith, History of Assyria, p. 126.

2 Schrader, A.A. 7., pp. 346-7 ; comp. R.P., i. 26.

3 Bull Inscription, line 23, &.P., vii. 61 (foot).

4 The Mitunu cylinder (note% p. 205) has settled this, for the eponomy of Mitunu
was in the year 700,‘ consequently’(as Prof. Schrader, in a private letter, remarks) ‘ the
Syro-Phoenician campaign had already taken place in this year. And since the Bellino
cylinder, dated in the eponomy of Nabulih, i.e. in the year 702, is silent as to this
campaign, it is clear that the campaign against Palestine and Egypt must have taken
place lhetween 702 and 700, presumably therefore in 7or,'

* See note on xx, 1,

CHAP. XXXVI] ISAIAH. 297

fact we owe to the Assyrian account '), and proceeded to summon Jeru-
salem to surrender (here we follow the Biblical narrative). It was pro-
bably (see pp. 109, 189) during the victorious march of the Assyrian
detachment that Isaiah wrote the prophecies in chap. xvii. 12-14 and
chap. xxxiii., of which the former was apparently composed a little the
earlier, though the latter, from the varied nature of its contents, is the
more interesting. The prophecy in xxxvii. 21-35,” self-evidently genuine,
in spite of—or rather, because of—its unusually inartistic form, may be
taken as a pendant to the more elaborate oracle in chap. xxxiii. The
chief difference between these two prophetic ‘ words’ is that chap. xxxiii.
regards the invasion from a human point of view—that of the sufferers,
chap. xxxvil. 21-35, from the serene height of the prophetic watch-tower,
nay, of Jehovah himself.

Let us now turn to the Assyrian account. This has been so often
quoted, that I may assume a general acquaintance with it on the part of
the reader. There are two passages* which apparently conflict with
portions of the Hebrew record ; let us briefly consider these.

(1) In the inscription on the Taylor cylinder (col. ii., lines 20-23),
Sennacherib, who, like his royal predecessors, often ascribes to himself the
achievements of his officers, gives this account of the siege of Jerusalem :—

‘.. Him (Khazakiau) like a caged bird within Ursalimmu his royal
city I enclosed; towers against him I raised; the exits of the great
gate of his city I blockaded.’

This is surely inconsistent with Isa. xxxvii. 33 (=2 Kings xix. 32),
where Isaiah is represented as prophesying that the king of Assyria should
not ‘come before [Jerusalem] with shields, nor cast up a bank against
it’—It may be observed, however, (1) that it is not quite certain that
Isaiah really delivered such a prophecy, for his great and undoubtedly
genuine oracle has a well-marked conclusion at xxxvii. 29; (2) that, if
these words be genuine, they afford a signal proof that, in the reproduc-
tion of Divine revelations, the prophetic writers were not secured from
small errors of detail. The wonderfulness of the removal of the invaders
does not in the least depend on the erection or non-erection of siege-
towers. Granting that Sennacherib’s general did ‘cast up a bank against’
Jerusalem ; granting that he even broke through the great gate of the
city; this does not necessarily involve an inconsistency with the main
point of Isaiah’s revelation, viz., that the Jews should in a wonderful
manner be relieved from their invaders, at the very moment when human
aid was hopeless. Sennacherib himself does not go so far as to say that
he actually captured Jerusalem.

(2) The second apparent inconsistency between the Assyrian and the

1 Taylor cylinder, col. iii. 13, Schrader, X.A.T7., p. 293; &.P., i. 39.

? Twill not here enter on the question whether the last three verses (33-35) were
written at the same time as vv. 21-32.

3 M. Lenormant sees an inconsistency in the place given to Hezekiah’s payment of
tribute in the Assyrian and the Biblical accounts respectively (see Les premiéres civili-
sations, ii, 288), but on the hypothesis of H. Brandes, adopted above, the tribute
referred to in 2 Kings xviii. 14 was paid to Sargon, not Sennacherib. Another incon-
sistency might be supposed in the reference to Tirhakah (2 Kings xix. 9) ; see, how-
ever, p. IIo.

208 ISATAH. [CHAP. XXXVI.

Biblical accounts has reference to Tirhakah, whoseapproach, in conjunction
with the ‘kings of Egypt,’ and its consequences, are described briefly but
with great distinctness in the Assyrian inscriptions. The text on the
Taylor cylinder (col. ii., lines 73-82) contains the following statement :—

‘... the kings! of Egypt had gathered together the archers, the
chariots, the horses of the king of Meroe —a force without number, and
they came to their help (i.e., to the help of the Ekronites, see p. 206): the
line of battle was placed before me over against Altaku.3 They called
upon their troops. In the service of Asshur my lord, I fought with them
and wrought their overthrow. The charioteers and the sons of the king
of Egypt, together with the charioteers of the king of Meroe, my hands
took in the midst of the battle.’

It is at any rate a plausible conjecture that there is a reference to this
in the prediction in Isa. xxxvii. 7 (comp. v. 9). If so, it would seem to
follow (1) that the prophet ascribes the retreat of Sennacherib to the
operations of Tirhakah rather than to a ‘destroying angel, and (2) that
he did not look forward to such a complete (?) success at Jerusalem for
Sennacherib, as the Taylor cylinder describes.

These two implications inay appear to some to be unfavourable to the
accuracy of the prophet (if at least he really uttered the words ascribed
to him). But, in the first place, it may fairly be asked whether the Assy-
rian account is not guilty, to some extent at least, of a vainglorious
exaggeration? Dr. Schrader has well pointed out‘ that Sennacherib
omits the number of the prisoners and of the captured chariots, which is
rarely neglected in the bulletin-like Assyrian inscriptions ; also that in
Sennacherib’s later inscriptions he mentions payment of tribute by
Hezekiah, but not the victory of Altaku. We may also reasonably ask
why Sennacherib did not utilise the triumphant success ascribed to him,
and press on to the conquest of Egypt. Dr. Schrader concludes that
Sennacherib, though not actually beaten, obtained the victory with so
much difficulty that he was compelled to withdraw from the struggle
with Egypt ; and he willingly admits that Sennacherib’s departure may
have been accelerated by the breaking out of a pestilence such as that
described in 2 Kings xix. 35 (=Isa. xxxvil. 36), and apparently in
Herod. ii. 141.5

1 ‘Kings,’ because of the dismemberment of Egypt already referred to. Or (cf, the
Hebrew idiom in Jer. xvii. 20, xxv. 18) the ‘sons of the king of Egypt’ mentioned
afterwards ; but this is less probable, as the royal family did not exercise that semi-regal
power in Egypt which it seems to have acquired in Judah. ‘ The king of Egypt’ will
be the principal of these kings, i.e., Shabataka.

2 The Assyrian has Milukhkhi. The king in question is Shabataka ; see p. 110.

3 The same as the Eltekeh of Josh. xix. 44.

4 Schenkel's Bitel-Lexikon, art. Sanherib, v. 176.

5 Dr. Schrader’s words are: Nicht ausgeschlossen ist bei dieser Lage der Dinge,
iibrigins, dass fiir seinen Entschluss, definitiv den Riickzug anzutreten, schliesslich ein
Ereigniss entscheidend wurde, wie wir es in der Bibel (2 KGn, 19, 35 fg.) angedeutet
finden, namlich eine Pest, welche vielleicht infolge der gelieferten Schla: ht oder iiber-
haupt infolge des Krieges im Heer ausgebrochen war und dasselbe decimirt hatte (vgl.
Herodot. ii. 141),' Bz ef Lexikon, v.176. This leaves it undecided whether the plague
among the Assyrians broke out at Pelusium (comp. Herod., /.c.), or before Jerusalem
(as the Hebrew narrative has been thought by some to imply). ‘The reference to

Herodotus, however, suggests that Dr. Schrader agrees with Thenius and Professor
Rawlinson in placing the calamity at Pelusium,

CHAP, XXXVI.] ISAIAH. 209

On the one hand, then, Sennacherib (if we accept Dr. Schrader’s very
plausible conjecture) exaggerates the importance of his ‘ Pyrrhus-victory’
at Altaku ; on the other, he makes no reference to the calamity which
befell a portion of his army before Jerusalem. This is in accordance with
the well-known style of imperial bulletins. Perhaps, however, the Assyrian
annalist has, in spite of himself, given a hint of the missing facts,
M. Lenormant has already drawn attention! to the evident embarrassment
of the Assyrian annalist after he has related the first events of the invasion
of the kingdom of Judah. He transports us abruptly to Nineveh, with-
out telling us why or how; and soon after we read of a fresh outbreak
of rebellion in Babylonia, of which the indomitable Merodach Baladan is
the soul.

Such are the main points in this remarkable group of chapters (xxxvi.—
xxxix.) which are susceptible of illustration from Assyriology. There
remain two other classes of questions which it seems unwise to discuss
here, as they would lead us too far away from the exegesis of the Book of
Isaiah. If, however, the student wishes to know some of the leading
data, and some of the possible solutions, he may still be referred to The
Book of Isaiah Chronologically Arranged (pp. 101-103). I mean, in the
first place, the question as to the origin of these chapters, and as to their
relation to the parallel section of the Second Book of Kings ; and, in the
second, as to the degree in which historical accuracy can be claimed for
them. Did the range of Isaiah’s historical narratives (such is one of the
questions which may be asked) extend to the reign of Hezekiah, or did he
confine himself to describing the ‘acts of Uzziah’?? Even granting that
he wrote some account of the Assyrian invasions in the reign of Hezekiah,
is it probable that this account was at all more elaborate than the narra-
tives in chaps. vii. and xx., which are merely explanatory introductions to
the following prophecies? With regard to the strict historical accuracy
of this part of our book, I have drawn attention in 7. C, A. to at least a
verbal inconsistency between Isa. xxxvii. 30-32 and v. 36 of the same
chapter, to the juxtaposition of two events in xxxvii. 36 and 37, which
the Assyrian inscriptions prove to have been separated by a considerable
interval, and to the want of analogy inthe preceding prophecies of Isaiah
for such an extraordinary sign as that in xxxviii. 8, and for so circum-
stantial a prediction as that in xxxyiii. 5. If these chapters are not by a
contemporary writer, we need not be surprised should the representation
of facts turn ont to be imperfect.

1 And it came to pass in the fourteenth year of the king
Hezekiah, that Sennacherib king of Assyria went up against

1 There is probably a mistake in the name of the Assyrian king in

1 Lenormant, Les premiéres civilisations, ii. 288, 289. Let me warmly recommend
the graphic and fact-full essay (‘ Un patriote babylonien du huitieme siecle avant notre
ére’) of which this passage forms part, It originally appeared in a separate form in
the Correspondant.

2 See 2 Chron. xxvi. 22. The phraseology of 2 Chron. xxxii. 32 is obscure, and
susceptible of more than one interpretation (sce /.C..4., p. xv. of the Introduction).

VOL. I. P

210 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXXVI.

all the fortified cities of Judah, and took them.* ? And the
king of Assyria sent® the Rab-shakeh from Lachish to Jeru-
salem to the king Hezekiah with a great army. And he
stationed himself by the conduit of the upper pool on the
highway of the fuller’s field. *° And there went out to him*
Eliakim, son of Hilkiah, who was over the house, and Shebna
the secretary, and Joah, son of Asaph, the annalist. 4 And

® 2 Kings xviii. inserts (vv. 14-16), ‘And Hezekiah king of Judah sent to the king
of Assyria to Lachish, saying, I have offended : turn back from me: that which thou
puttest upon me, I will bear. And the king of Assyria laid upon Hezekiah three
hundred talents of silver, and thirty talents of gold. And Hezekiah gave up all the
silyer that was found in the house of Jehovah, and in the treasures of the king’s house.
At that time did Hezekiah cut away (the gold from) the doors of the temple of Jehovah,
and (from) the pillars which Hezekiah king of Judah had overlaid, and gave it to the
king of Assyria.’

> 2 Kings xviii. 17 inserts, ‘The Tartan and the Rab-saris and.’

© 2 Kings xviii. 18 reads, ‘And they called for the king and there came out to them.’

this verse. It is Sargon’s invasion
which seems to be referred to (see
above, p. 203).

Sennacherib] The native Assy-
rian form of the name is Sin-akhi-
irib=‘Sin (the Moongod) gave
many brothers ;’ the Hebrew, San-
khérib,—— And took them] The
Chronicler puts it differently—
‘thought to conquer them’ (2 Chr.
Xxxll. 1).

2? The king of Assyria] Here
and subsequently it is correct to
understand Sennacherib, the con-
fused reference to Sargon’s cam-
paign being confined to wv. 1.
Sent the Rab-shakeh| In 2 Kings
xvill. 17. we find mention of ‘the
Tartan and the Rab-saris,’ as well
as ‘the Rab-shakeh, and as in
Isa. xxxvii. 6, 24 the ‘servants’ of
the king of Assyria are spoken of,
it seems probable that the two
former titles have fallen out of the
text of this verse. All three are
designations of high Assyrian offi-
cers. For the first, see on xx. I.
The second means in Hebrew chief
of the eunuchs, and is probably the
translation of an Assyrian court-
title. The third, viz. ‘the Rab-
shakeh,’ in its Hebrew form suggests
the meaning ‘chief butler’ (comp.
Gen. x]. 2 Hebr.)—a very singular
office to be mentioned here, but the

truth is that the Jews simply repro-
duced a native Assyrian (or rather
half-Assyrian, half-Accadian)! title,
viz. rab-saqé, ‘chief of the officers,’
a military officer, next in rank, asit
seems, to the Tartan (see Friedr.
Delitzsch, <Assyrische Studien, i.
131). From Lachish] The cap-
ture of Lachish was thought impor-
tant enough to be commemorated
on two large bas-reliefs in Sen-
nacherib’s palace; one of these
has an explanatory inscription (see
T. S. B. A., 1878, plate opposite
p. 85). The importance of the
place doubtless arose from its
commanding the direct route from
Egypt to Judah. Sennacherib could
here await the Egyptians (see
xxxvii. 8). By the conduit of
the upper pool] The very spot
where Ahaz had held his famous
colloquy with Isaiah (vii. 3). Un-
belief was represented then by an
Israelite ; now, more naturally, by
an Assyrian.

3 Eliakim] The disciple of
Isaiah has supplanted Shebna the
foreigner : see on xxii. 15-25.

* The Rab-shakeh speaks ; per-
haps the Tartan was too grand an
officer. The great king] He re-
fuses to recognize Hezekiah as a
king. The right of the strongest
throws Judah prostrate at the feet

1 Such a hybrid formation is more startling to us than it was to the Assyrians, who
had adopted sag ' officer, captain ‘ into their vocabulary,

CHAP. XXXVI] ISATAH. 211

the Rab-shakeh said to them, Say ye, I pray, to Hezekiah,
Thus saith the great king, the king of Assyria, What is this
trust with which thou trustest? 54 Thinkest thou that a mere
word of the lips is counsel and strength for war?! Now on
whom dost thou trust, that thou hast rebelled against me ?
6 Behold thou trustest on this staff of a cracked reed, on
Egypt ; which, if a man lean on it, will go into his hand, and
pierce it: so is Pharaoh, king of Egypt, to all who trust in
him. 7And if thou sayest unto me, In Jehovah, our God, is
our trust, is it not he, whose high places and whose altars
Hezekiah hath taken away, and hath said to Judah and to
Jerusalem, Before this altar shall ye worship? *® And now
exchange pledges, I pray, with my lord, the king of Assyria.
I will give thee two thousand horses, if thou art able to set for
thyself riders upon them. ° How then canst thou turn away

4 So 2 Kings xviii. 20, according to the rendering of Seinecke and Wellhausen.

The Hebr, text of Isaiah has, ‘ I say—only a word of the lips—counsel and strength for
war,’ which Tequires us to supply ‘sayest thou, but it is’ after ‘I say,’ and ‘I have’

before ‘ counsel.’

of the ‘great king.’ Sarru rabbu,
‘great king,’ sarru danni, ‘strong
king, sar késsddz, ‘ king of hosts,’ are
the constant descriptive titles ap-
plied to themselves by the Assyrian
kings.

® He does not accuse Hezekiah
of conspiring with Merodach Bala-
dan; on this point see above,
p. 204. A cracked reed] Not ‘a
broken reed,’ as Auth, Vers., for
who could even try to lean on such
a staff? (Comp. xlii. 3, ‘a cracked
reed he shall not break.) Whereas
the thick stem of the Avundo donax,
so common both in Egypt and in
Palestine, would give a show of
support even when ‘cracked.’ The
speaker alludes to the weakening
effects of disunion and defeat in
Egypt (see on chap. xix, and xxx.
3, 5, 7). Parallel passage, Ezek.
xxix. 6, 7. Pharaoh, king of
Eeypt] Here, as in the Assyrian
inscriptions, the title Pharaoh is
used inaccurately as a proper name.
The particular Pharaoh intended
is Shabataka (see Introd. to chap.
xviii.).

7 And if thou sayest unto me]
The Assyrians had a well-organised

intelligence-department. Senna-
cherib had heard of the reforma-
tion of worship undertaken by
Hezekiah (2 Kings xviii. 4, comp.
2 Chron. xxxi. 1), This, from his
heathen point of view, was an act
of gross impiety towards Jehovah ;
for had not Jehovah been wor-
shipped from time immemorial at
most if not all of the ‘high places’?
The local sanctuaries designated by
the latter phrase appear from the
inscriptions to have been known in
Assyria and Babylonia as well as
Palestine ; indeed, they go back to
Accadian—i.e,, pre-Semitic—times
(Sayce, 7. S. B. A, iv. 30).

8,9 These two verses are spoken
by the Rab-shakeh in his own
name, though in the spirit of his
master. In v. 10 he returns to
the royal message, precisely as the
Hebrew prophets speak, sometimes
more directly, sometimes less, in
the name of Jehovah, There is
therefore no occasion on this ground
to disintegrate the narrative with
Mr. Sayce (Theological Review,
1873, p. 22).—We have first a dis-
paraging comparison between the
weakness of the Jews (which sug-

P2

21.2 ISATAII. [CHAP. XXXVI.

the face of a single prefect from among the meanest servants
of my lord? This is why thou trustest in Egypt for chariots
and for horsemen. }° And now, is it apart from Jehovah that
I have come up against this land to destroy it? Jehovah said
unto me, Go up against yonder land and destroy it. !! And
Eliakim and Shebna and Joah said to the Rab-shakeh, Pray
speak unto thy servants in Aramean, for we understand it,
and do not speak to us in Jewish in the ears of the people
who are upon the wall. 'And the Rab-shakeh said, Is it to
thy lord and to thee that my lord hath sent me to speak these

gests that there is some degree of
oratorical exaggeration in ii. 7) and
the strength of the Assyrians in
cavalry (comp. v. 28) ; this of course
implies tacitly that a small detach-
ment of the Assyrian army would
be equal to overpowering the Jews.
The face] i.e., the attack ——
Prefect] The Hebr. fakhath (‘con-
struct’ form of ZekAah) has nothing
to dowith the mod. Persian ‘pasha,’
but comes direct from the Assyrian
pakhat ‘provisional governor.’
This is why... | i.e., because
Judah itself is so deficient in
cavalry.

10 Sennacherib professes to have
received an oracle from Jehovah,
who is irritated at the overthrow of
his high places. One cannot help
conjecturing that here, as in v. 15,
the writer has given an Israelitish
colouring to the ideas of the Assy-
rian (like Isaiah x. 10), in spite of
the inconsistent statement in v. 20.
Still it is only the word Jehovah
which is out of place. ‘Go, take
Nebo (in war) against Israel,’
says the god Chemosh to king
Mesha on the Moabite Inscription ;
a prophet or a dream-voice (see
R.P., ix. 52) may have seemed to
give a similar bidding to Senna-
cherib.

11 Well did Nahum _ prophesy
(ii. 13), ‘ The voice of thy messen-
gers shall no more be heard.’ The
Rab-shakeh’s speech was so well
calculated to impress the multitude
that Eliakim and his companions
beg him to employ the Aramaic
instead of the ‘Jewish’ tongue.

The statement implies that Assy-
rian as well as Jewish officials were
acquainted with Aramaic, as being
the great commercial language of
Syria, Palestine, and West Asia.
Nor are we confined to mere in-
ference. Private contract-tablets
in Aramaic and Assyrian have been
found in the remains of ancient
Nineveh. But the Rab-shakeh
hada still wider range of linguistic
knowledge. He belonged to a
nation which had a genuine interest
in the study of languages, and his
official duties doubtless prompted
him to extend his knowledge to
the utmost. No wonder, then, if
he could speak Hebrew. There is
much difficulty, however, in the
application of the term Jewish.
In xix. 18 Isaiah speaks of Hebrew
as ‘the tongue of Canaan,’ which
shows (in harmony with the in-
scription on the Moabite Stone)
that the language of Judah cannot
have differed materially from that
of the rest of Palestine (Phoenicia
of course being excluded). ‘Jewish,’
therefore, means Hebrew, and not
merely the dialect of the tribe of
Judah (as Naeg.). But the only
other example (except in the pa-
rallel passages in Kings and Chro-
nicles) of this use of the word isin a
passage of post-Exile date(Neh. xiii.
24). It is only reasonable to infer
that this account of the proceed-
ings of the Rab-shakeh has been,
at any rate, considerably modified
by a post-Exile writer.

? who sit upon the wall] Who
are stationed there for defence.——

CHAP. XXXVI.J

ISAIAH. 213

words? is it not to the men who sit upon the wall, to eat
their dung and to drink their urine with you? And the
Rab-shakeh stood forth, and cried with a loud voice in
Jewish, and said, Hear ye the words of the great king, the
king of Assyria. | Thus saith the king, Let not Hezekiah
deceive you, for he will not be able to deliver you. ' And
let not Hezekiah make you trust in Jehovah, saying, Jehovah
will surely deliver us ; this city shall not be surrendered into
the hand of the king of Assyria. 1! Hearken not to Heze-
kiah ; for thus saith the king of Assyria, Make a treaty with
me, and come out to me, and eat ye every one of his vine,
and every one of his fig-tree, and drink ye every one the water
of his cistern; 7 until I come and take you away to a land
like your own land, a land of corn and grapes, a land of
breadcorn and orchards.° '8 Beware lest Hezekiah entice
you,! saying, Jehovah will deliver us, Have the gods of the
nations delivered, every one his land, from the hand of the
king of Assyria? '® Where are the gods of Hamath and
Arpad ? where are the gods of Sepharvaim & ? and how much
less have [its gods] delivered Samaria out of my hand!

° 2 Kings xviii. 32 adds, A land of generous olive-trees and of honey, that ye may
live, and not die ; and hearken not to Hezekiah.

f 2 Kings xviii. 32 reads, For he enticeth you.

& 2 Kings xviii. 34 adds, Hena and Ivvah (see note ® on chap. xxxvii.).

To eat . . .] i.e, with no other
result than their being reduced to
the utmost conceivable distress.

18 Eliakim has given the Rab-
shakeh an advantage of which the
clever courtier at once avails him-
self. He now comes forward in
the character of a friend of the
deluded Jewish people.

4 and let not Hezekiah. . .}
Here, as in v. 10, a Jewish colour-
ing is distinctly visible. An As-
syrian, as Mr. Sayce has remarked
(Theological Review, 1873, Pp. 23),
‘would hardly have been able to re-
produce so exactly the encourage-
ment held out by Isaiah’(xxxvii. 35).

6 Make a treaty] Lit.,‘a bless-
ing, treaties being accompanied
with mutual benedictions. The
phrase is unique, but is analogous
tothe use of ‘ blessing’ in the sense
of ‘apresent’ (frequently).—-Come
out] i.e., surrender, as 1 Sam. xi. 3,

Jer. xxxvill. 173——Eatye.. .]}
Le., in that case ye shall enjoy your
land undisturbed, until Sennache-
rib has brought his campaign
against Egypt to a close ; then, no
doubt, ye will be removed from
your home, but a new home will
be given you equal to the old.

18 Beware lest Hezekiah .. .]
The Assyrian is inconsistent. In his
first speech he had stated himself
to be the obedient instrument of
Jehovah (v. 10); here, in accord-
ance with x. 10, 11, he represents
the wars of the Assyrians as in-
spired by a religious hostility to all
the ‘gods of the nations.’

19 Where are the gods of Ha-
math ...] The answer would have
been, In Assyrian shrines: see
Rawlinson, Ancient Monarchies, i.
475. Parallel passage, x. 9.
Sepharvaim] See on xxxvii.13.—
Have [its gods]...] Supply the

214 ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XXXVII.

*° Which are they among all the gods of these lands which
have delivered their land out of my hand? how much less
can Jehovah deliver Jerusalem out of my hand! ?! And } they
kept silence, and answered him not a word, for the king’s
commandment ran thus, Ye shall not answer him. ” And
there came Eliakim, son of Hilkiah, who was over the house,
and Shebna the secretary, and Joah, son of Asaph, the anna-
list, to Hezekiah with rent clothes, and they told him the
words of the Rab-shakeh.

5 2 Kings xviii. 36 reads, The people.

bracketted words from the context ;
comp. ‘the gods of the nations,’ wv
18.

7° out of my hana] Either the
speaker claims a royal license
in dealing with facts ; or the com-

piler confounds Sargon with Sen-
nacherib.

Ve shall not answer him]
For the Jews had, in fact, nothing
that would seem, from an Assyrian
point of view, a satisfactory answer.

CHAPTER XXXVII.

1 And it came to pass, when the king Hezekiah heard it,
that he rent his clothes, and covered himself with sackcloth,
and came into the house of Jehovah. * And he sent Eliakim,
who was over the house, and Shebna the secretary, and the
clders of the priests, covered with sackcloth, to Isaiah the
prophet, son of Amoz. And they said unto him, Thus saith
Hezekiah, This day is a day of trouble and punishment and
contumely, for the children have come to the birth, and there

is not strength to bring forth.

2 This distinguished embassy
shows the political importance at-
taching to Isaiah and indeed to the
prophetic office in itself. Similar
applications for prophetic interven-
tion are recorded to Huldah (2 Kings
xxii. 14) and to Jeremiah (Jer. xxxvii.
3). On the other hand, Ahab
evinces his hostile spirit by send-
ing an ordinary courtier to fetch
Micaiah (1 Kings xxii. 9).

3 Punishment] The sense ‘re-
buke’ (Auth. Vers.) is clearly un-
suitable. Judicial decision is the
root-meaning ; the context must
determine the more precise refer-
ence. See Hos. v. 9, Ps. exlix. 7.
~——Contumely] i.e, blasphemy.

‘Perhaps Jehovah thy God

This rend. suits the context (see v.
4), and is required in the other pas-
sages where the word occurs (with
one vowel-point different), viz. Neh.
ix, 18, 26, Ezek. xxxv. 12,——The
children have come...] A
proverbial expression rises natu-
rally to the lips to express the utter
collapse of all human resources.
One hope, indeed, as the next verse
shows, still remains—a hope in the
Biblical sense, i.e., a sure confi-
dence—the faithfulness of Jehovah.
Comp. the similar transition, fol-
lowing upon the same figure, in
Hos. xiii. 14.

‘ ‘will hear] The word includes
the idea of corresponding action.

CHAP. XXXVIL] ISAIAH. 215
will hear the words of the Rab-shakeh, with which the king
of Assyria, his lord, hath sent him to reproach the living
God, and will deal punishment for the words which Jehovah
thy God hath heard, and thou wilt utter a prayer for the rem-
nant which exists. ° And the servants of the king Hezekiah
came to Isaiah. ® And Isaiah said unto them, Thus shall ye
say unto your lord, Thus saith Jehovah, Be not afraid because
of the words which thou hast heard, with which the minions
of the king of Assyria have reviled me. 7 Behold, I will place.
a spirit in him, so that he shall hear tidings, and return to his
own land ; and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his

own land.

8 And the Rab-shakeh returned and found the king of
Assyria warring against Libnah, for he had heard that he

——Utter a prayer] The inter-
cessory prayers of a prophet
‘availed much’; see Ex. xxxii. I0,
Il, Jer. xv. I. The remnant
which exists] Forty-six fortified
towns had been already taken (it
appears from the Assyrian account),
when the Assyrian general (accord-
ing to the Hebrew account) sum-
moned Jerusalem to surrender.

5 and...came to Isaiah]
An inartistic resumption of the
narrative, such as often occurs in
the narrative books, designed per-
haps to comment on Isaiah’s phrase
‘your lord.’

8 fhe minions] It is a dispa-
raging expression (not ‘ad/dé, as v.
5, but za‘dré). Del. renders knap-
pen (=squires).

7 x will place a spirit in him]
‘A spirit’? is probably not to be
understood personally (comp. I
Sam. xviii. 10, 1 Kings xxii. 21),
but in the weaker sense of impulse,
inclination ; comp. xix. 14, xxix. I0,
Num. v. 14, Hos. iv. 12, Zech. xiii. 2.
The two senses are, however, very
closely connected. The Egyptians
believed in the existence, in the
supersensible world, of a genius, a
spirit, or an eiSwAov, even of ab-
stract qualities or official dignities
—the name for such a genius was
ka (Le Page Renouf, 7. S. B. A.,
1878, p. 494, &c.; Hibbert Lectures,

1879, p. 147, &c.) The rendering of
Auth, Vers. is against the Hebrew
idiom. Shall hear tidings]
We are not told whether these
‘tidings’ referred to the hostile
movement of Tirhakah (see v. 9),
or to the pestilence mentioned (ap-
parently) in v. 36, or, what seems
a more probable reason for Sen-
nacherib’s ‘return to his own land,’
to some insurrection in another
part of the Assyrian empire. Del.
combines the two former refer-
ences ; Kuenen (Zhe Prophets and
Prophecy in Israel, p. 296), pro-
nounces for the latter. The absence
of any explanation confirms the
view that the narrative in its pre-
sent form belongs to a time when
the traditional knowledge of the
events was confined to the broad
outlines of history——Cause him
to fall. . . | The last twenty years
of Sennacherib’s reign seem to have
left no traces in Jewish tradition.
See on z 38.

8 warring against Libnah] No
doubt this movement was dictated
by the approach of the Egyptians.
Libnah is generally placed near
Lachish ; a place of this name be-
longed to the tribe of Judah (Josh.
xv. 42). It is bold in M. Oppert to
identify this Libnah with Pelusium
(comp. Herod. ii. 141).

216 ISAIAII, [CHAP. XXXVIL,

had broken up from Lachish. ® And he heard say concern-
ing Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, He is gone forth to fight
against thee. And “he again sent * messengers to Hezekiah,
saying, '° Thus shall ye say unto Hezekiah, king of Judah,
Let not thy God, in whom thou trustest, deceive thee, saying,
Jerusalem shall not be surrendered into the hand of the king
of Assyria. | Behold, thou thyself hast heard what the
kings of Assyria have done unto all lands, destroying them
utterly ; and canst thou be delivered? Did the gods of
the nations which my fathers destroyed deliver them, (such
as) Gozan, and Haran, and Rezeph, and the Sons of Eden
who were in Telassar? '’ Where is the king of Hamath, and

® So 2 Kings xix. 9 and Sept. (virtually, both here and in 2 Kings) ;—Text, he

heard it and sent.

® Tirhakah|] Famous both in
the Assyrian and in the Egyptian
inscriptions (comp. on xvill. 2),
though a long historical inscrip-
tion of his own has not yet been
found. The former call him Tarku,
the latter Tahdraqa; comp. the
Hebr. accentuation Tirhdkah. As-
surbanipal, like the Hebrew writer,
calls him ‘king (se) of Cush,’ some-
times also ‘king of Mucur and
Cush.—As to the accuracy of the
reference to Tirhakah, see introd.
to chap. xviii.

10 The message is an amplifica-
tion of the argument in xxxvi. 18-
21.

2 wry fathers] This must mean
‘my predecessors, for Sargon
founded a new dynasty. Gozan,
&c.] All Mesopotamian towns and
districts (see Schrader, A. G. F.
p- 199). Telassar]| Hebraised
from Tul-Asur, ‘hill of Asur’
(Asshur). Shalmaneser II. relates
how he went out against a strong-
hold belonging to Akhuni the Son
of Adini; put him to flight, and
conquered several cities on both
sides of the Euphrates. Of four!
of these he says he changed the
names, and the type of two of the
names (‘ Law, Command of Asur’)
is exactly like Tul-Asur. It may
be inferred that either Shalmaneser

1 So Sayce, &. P., iii, 92:

or Sargon gave the latter name to
another of the cities of Bit-Adini.
This was a petty kingdom extend-
ing some little way both east and
west of the Euphrates (Schrader,
2. c.). Whether it is the Beth-Eden
of Am, i. 5 may be questioned ;
its identity with the Eden of our
passage and of Ezek. xxvii. 23
seems evident. Sons of Eden]
A tribal appellation, comp. ‘Son
of Adini’ above, and note on
XXXIX, I.

' -wrhere is the king of Hamath
A ] (For the first two names
comp. on x. 9.) The connection
between vv. 12, 13, escapes those
who take ‘king’ in the phrase
‘king of Hamath’ in its limited
modern application, whereas ‘king’
here, as so often in the Semitic
languages (comp. vili. 21), means
tutelary god. As Clericus saw, this
follows from xxxvi. 19. Sephar-
vaim] The Babylonian Sippar,
the city of the sun-god (see inscr.
in next note), discovered by Mr.
Rassam in the mounds of Abu
Habba, about 16 miles S.W. of
Bagdad. Anciently the Euphrates
flowed past it. There, according
to Berusus, the sacred (mythologi-
cal) tablets were deposited, probably
because Sippar was safe from the
inundations of the canals. As to

Schrader, however, says three.

CHAP. XXXVI1.]

ISAIAH.

217

the king of Arpad, and the king of the city of Sepharvaim,

bof Hana, and of Avvah ??

4 And Hezekiah took the letter from the hand of the mes-
sengers, and read it: and Hezekiah went up unto the house

> The Hebr. punctuation gives eva v'tvva, which most understand to be names of
places, Hena and Ivvah, but which rather mean ‘he hath made to wander, and over-
turned’ (so apparently the Targum and Symmachus), This is obviously a wrong view

of the original.
by the Avva of 2 Kings xvii. 24 (Hebr.),

the termination, see on Micraim
xix. 6.° Others have thought of
Sibraim (Ezek. xlvii. 16), which suits
geographically, but is too obscure
a place. In any case, the name is
not connected with sépier, a book.’
——Hana and Avvah]| Avwvah is
still a puzzle to me, but may we
not venture to identify Hana with
the HYana (near Carchemish) men-
tioned in an inscription found on
the site of Sepharvaim, ‘ To Samas,
king of heaven and earth, [his] king,
Tugulti-Mer king of Hana, son of
Ilu-Saba, for the [safety] of his
land, and his (own) protection, he
has given (this instrument).’—Pvo-
ceedings of S. B. A., 1883, p. 14.

4 The letter] The word is in
the plural (we might render ‘the
leaves’); comp. /ztere. Went
up into the house of Jehovah]
George Smith suggests a striking
parallel from the annals of Assur-
banipal’s warfare against Teumman
the Elamite——Teumman’s vow,
Assurbanipal’s tears before Istar,
the oracle heard by a seer in a
dream, and repeated to the king
(Assyria, p. 156, Records of the
Past, ix. 50-52). The contrast lies
inthe absence of self-commendation
in Hezekiah’s prayer, and in Jeho-
vah’s promise to overthrow Sen-
nacherib without human agency.
Moreremarkable still is the counter-
part of Hezekiah’s prayer and of its
answer in Herodotus’ version (inay
we say?) of the Egyptian account
of Sennacherib’s overthrow. ‘On
this the monarch (Sethos), greatly
distressed, entered into the inner
sanctuary, and before the image of
the god (Ptah) bewailed the fate
which impended over him. As he
wept he fell asleep, and dreamed

Sept., 2 Kings xviii. 34, has "Ava nai ’ABd.

Avvah is also supported

that the god came and stood by his
side, bidding him be of good cheer,
and go boldly forth to meet the
Arabian (Assyrian) host, which
would do him no hurt, as he himself
would send those who should help
him’ (Herod. ii. 141 Rawl.). There
is here still the same contrast with
the immediateness of Jehovah’s in-
tervention according to Isaiah’s
prophecy. The last words, written
with full conviction, lead me to ask
how far the prayer of Hezekiah can
be regarded as authentic. Kuenen
has already remarked that no such
strong statement of monotheism
occurs in the works of Hezekiah’s
contemporaries, Isaiah and Micah,
and it seems a natural supposition
that the more developed faith of the
later writer has here given a colour-
ing tohislanguage. Yet I think we
may assert that Hezekiah (as one
probably of the outer circle of
Isaiah’s adherents) felt as a mono-
theist, though his conscious belief
was probably even less distinct than
Isaiah’s. With this reserve, we
may admit the prayer of Hezekiah
as being at any rate as accurate an
expression of his sentiments as that
in the Annals of Assurbanipal is of
that Assyrian king’s.x Spread it
before Jehovah] Not ‘in order
that the LorD himself might read
it’ (Thenius)—a survival of gross
anthropomorphism, which Gese-
nius even compares to the prayer-
machines of the Buddhists. The
action of ‘spreading out’ the letter
is symbolical ; hence the combina-
tion of phrases in v. 17, ‘hear’ and
‘see,’ both meaning simply ‘regard.’
It was the arrogance of which the
letter was the symbol which Jeho-
vah was besought to take notice of,

218 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXXVI.

of Jehovah, and spread it before Jehovah. And Hezekiah
prayed to Jehovah, saying, © Jehovah Sabdoth, God of Israel,
who °inhabitest the cherubim, thou art alone the (true) God
for all the kingdoms of the earth ; thou hast made the heavens
and the earth. 1 Incline, Jehovah, thine ear and hear; open
thine eyes, Jehovah, and see; and hear all the words of Sen-
nacherib, which he hath sent to reproach the living God.
'8 Of a truth, Jehovah, the kings of Assyria have laid waste
all the “nations and their land, and have put their gods
into the fire; for no gods were they, but the work of men’s
hands, wood and stone; and have destroyed them. ™ And
now, Jehovah our God, save us out of his hand, that all the
kingdoms of the earth may know that thou art Jehovah, thou
alone.

¢ So Ew., Riehm.—Art enthroned upon, Hitz., Del., Hengst., Keil, Oehler, Kay.
(See crit. note.)
4 So 2 Kings xix. 17.—TExT, lands (obviously a clerical error),

and it was the believing dependence
on Jehovah—not the mechanical act
here mentioned—which produced
the desired result. The spread out
Jetter was a ‘ prayer without words’
(Del.).

18 — Who inhabitest the cheru-
bim] There is perhaps a double
reference in this phrase, 1. to the
cherub of the storm-cloud (see
Encycl. Brit., art. ‘Cherubim’), 2.
to the figures of the cherubim on
the ark. For the former, comp.
Ps. xviii. 10, ‘And he rode upon a

Num. vii. 89, ‘He heard the voice
speaking unto him from off the lid
upon the ark of the witness, from
between the two cherubim,’ see also
Ex. xxv. 22.——Thou hast made
... ] The creative power of Je-
hovah, as contrasted with the im-
potence of the idols, becomes a
favourite subject of contemplation
in IT. Isaiah (xl. 18-26, xlii. 5-8) and
in the post-Exile psalms (Ps. xcvi. 5,
cxv. 3, 4, 15, Cxxxv. 5, 6) ; comp.
also the Chaldee insertion in Jer.
x. 11 (Q. P. B.)

cherub, and did fly ;’ for the latter,

Vu. 21-35. A prophecy ‘of striking interest, and both in form and
matter stamped with the mark of Isaiah’ (Z. C. 4., p. 101). This latter
point is of importance, as the Isaianic origin of the rest of the historical
section is so uncertain. Delitzsch divides the prophecy into eight almost
equal stanzas; but this seems arbitrary. We have before us—what is
unfortunately so rare—a discourse nearly, if not quite, in the form in which
it was delivered. All Isaiah’s other works evidently owe much to reflec-
tion and to art ; here however his genius appears in its native simplicity.
He seems to recognise (I am here speaking of his prophecy only as a
literary work) that he has a foeman worthy of his steel, and, in contrasting
the opposite religious spirits of Assyria and Israel, has done even-handed
justice to each. How vividly, too, and how poetically he has represented
the military prowess of his country’s enemies !—how truthfully, we may
now add, since the Assyrian monuments have placed us in a position to
judge! The eloquent Jines devoted by M. Lenormant! to Assyrian

1 Les premiéres civilisations, ii, 259, 260.

CHAP. XXXVII.] ISAIAH.

219

strategy rectify the unconscious injustice of historians, and attest the
accuracy of the Hebrew prophet.

2! And Isaiah, son of Amoz, sent unto Hezekiah, saying,
Thus saith Jehovah, the God of Israel, That which thou hast
prayed unto me concerning Sennacherib king of Assyria [* 1
have heard °]. %? This is the word which Jehovah hath spoken
against him, Despiseth and mocketh at thee the virgin-
daughter of Zion ; behind thee shaketh her head the daughter
of Jerusalem. * Whom hast thou reproached and reviled?
and against whom hast thou raised the voice? thou hast lifted
up thine eyes on high against the Holy One of Israel! * By
thy ‘servants thou hast reproached the Lord, and hast said,

e These words are supplied in 2 Kings xix, 20.
£ Messengers, 2 Kings xix. 23.

71 and Isaiah ... sent] Are
we to understand that Isaiah was
supernaturally warned of Hezekiah’s
prayer (comp. Acts ix. 11), or have
we simply a curtailed summary of
what took place?

22 Behind thee] Pursuing the
retreating foe.

*4 Have / ascended] /, the great,
the all-powerful king, have per-
formed this seemingly impossible
feat. The Assyrian inscriptions
present several parallels to this
boastful language. Thus Shalma-
neser says, ‘Trackless paths and
difficult mountains, which, like the
point of an iron sword, stood
pointed to the sky, on wheels of
iron and bronze I penetrated, lit.,
‘I dug up’ (&. P., iii. 85); and
Assurnacirpal, ‘Rugged paths, diffi-
cult mountains, which for the pas-
sage of chariots and armies was
(were) not suited, I passed ;’ ‘ The
rugged hill-country ... with in-
struments of iron I cut through’
(Rk. P., iii. 43, 58, comp. 60).
Similarly Tiglath-Pileser I. (2. P.,
ili, 9, 10, 16). Elsewhere, how-
ever, Shalmaneser at least 1s more
modest: ‘(My) warrior-host tra-
versed the mountain ; bravely (in)
its heart opposition it brought, and
ascended on its feet’ (R. P., iii. 97).

1 Boscawen, 7. S. B. A., vii. 352.

Clearly these boasts of Sennacherib
are not to be taken literally. He
was indeed no stranger to mountain-
passes, but it would seem that the
route of the Assyrian armies as far
as Aradus (the most northern Phee-
nician town) was by the shore—the
route of the present day.! The
boasts are to be explained (with
Knobel) on the analogy of the
phrase ‘to ride upon the high places
of the land’ (see on lviii. 14) =‘to
conquer and rule over it.’ Lebanon,
as the northern bulwark of the land
of Israel, is used as a representative
or symbol for the whole country
(comp. Zech. xi. 1). This applica-
tion of the word accounts for the
following futures, ‘1 will cut down
... I will enter,” which mean that
the conquest of Palestine had still
to be completed. (There is no
occasion to take the perfects as
perfects of prophetic certitude =‘ I
will ascend, &c.). I will cut
down... ] This feature in the
description must be taken symboli-
cally, if the view adopted at the end
of the last note be correct. Tall
cedars and choice fir-trees will be
‘kings, princes, nobles, all that is
highest and most stately’ (Birks),
comp. ii. 13, x. 34, lx. 13. But,
though symbolical, the description

This would bring him into the region of

the Nahr-el-Kelb, where one of the tablet-sculptures presents his unmistakable

features,

220

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XXXVIL.

With the multitude of my chariots have 7 ascended to the
height of the mountains, to the recesses of Lebanon; and I
will cut down its tallest cedars and its choicest pine-trees ;
and I will come into its farthest & height, its garden-like wood-

land.

°° T have digged and drunk "foreign waters, and will

dry up with the sole of my feet all the canals of Egypt.
°° Hast thou not heard ? long ago I made it, in ancient times

& Lodging-place, 2 Kings xix. 23.

b So 2 Kings xix. 24.

is in harmony with literal fact. The
felling of cedars, &c., in Lebanon
and Amanus is repeatedly men-
tioned in the Assyrian Annals, and
‘Remenen’ (Lebanon) appears in
Egyptian sculptures in relief, with
trees felled. The two kings referred
to above are fond of alluding to
this subject. Thus Assurnacirpal
‘caused the forests of all (his
enemies) to fall’ (2. P., iii. 40, 77),
and Shalmaneser calls himself ‘the
trampler on the heads of mountains
and all forests’ (2. P., iii. 83, comp.
p- 90). Such great builders needed
the wood for their palaces, their
fleets, and their machines of war.
But it was also a religious act to cut
down the trees; at any rate in a
country where the cultus of moun-
tains was so developed as in Syria.
Just so the Persians cut down the
sacred groves of the Greeks. Comp.
xiv. 8, Hab. ii. 17. Its farthest
height] Jerusalem, with its two
Lebanon-houses (templeand palace,
comp. on xxii. 8 Its garden-
like woodland] The prophet com-
bines two, strictly speaking, incon-
sistent expressions to convey an
idea of the strength and beauty of
Jerusalem. So of the Assyrians,
x. 18. Alt. rend. does not fit in so
well into the clause.

*5 x have digged...] Heimplies
that he has already exhausted the
natural streams of Palestine, and
been obliged to dig wells. ‘ Credi-
mus altos | Defecisse amnes, epo-
taque flumina Medo | Prandente,’
Juv. Saz., x. 176.—Or, if the per-
fect be prophetic (see note on v. 24),
he may refer to the desert of the
Tih (between Palestine and Egypt),

TEXT omits.

where the digging of wells would
be a necessity, and a hyperbole
need not be supposed.——will ary
up ...] He reserves his greatest
achievement for the last. The con-
quest of Egypt was the true goal
of the Assyrian kings. Hitherto
the Egyptians had trusted, to apply
the words used by Nahum (iii. 8) of
Thebes, in ‘her rampart the sea
(i.e., the Nile), and her wall of the
sea.’ But the many-branched Nile
should cease to be a protection ;
so numerous were the hosts of
Assyria. A castle in the air, so far
as Sennacherib himself was con-
cerned. The canals of Egypt]
Or, of the Fortified Land (see on
xix. 6).

2° Hast thou not heard. . .]
Sennacherib had, in fact, not heard,
but is not excusable on that ac-
count, comp. Mic. v. 15, Q. P. B.,
and see on x. 7. We may under-
stand v. 26 in three different ways:
(1) as a specimen of prophetic
irony: ‘so wise and so almighty in
your own esteem, are you, after all,a
poor ignorant mortal ?’ (Birks). Or
(2) we may justify Isaiah’s language
by the not improbable supposition
that the Assyrian officials, who were
acquainted with the Hebrew lan-
guage (see xxxvi. II), might if they
had liked have informed themselves
more accurately about the Jewish
religion. Or (3) we may suppose
Isaiah to be only nominally ad-
dressing Sennacherib, and really
intending a word of comfort for
Hezekiah. Gritz strangely takes
vv. 22-28 to be an extract from a
diplomatic letter (not, however,
denying Isaiah’s authorship).

CHAP. XXXVII.] ISAIAH. 22r

I fashioned it; now have I brought it to pass, that thou
mightest be (able) to destroy fortified cities into desolate
heaps. * And their inhabitants were ‘of small power, were
dismayed and ashamed ; they became (as) grass of the field,
and green herbage, blades of the housetops, andi a field (of
corn)) before it is in stalk. But thy sitting down and thy
going out and thy coming in do I know, and thy deep rage
against me. * Because of thy deep rage against me, and
that thy recklessness hath come up into mine ears, I will put
my hook into thy nose and my bridle into thy lips, and I

will turn thee back by the way by which thou camest.
3° And this shall be the sign unto thee :—one eateth this
year the after-growth, and the second year that which groweth

i Lit., short of hand.

j A blasting, 2 Kings xix. 26, and so Ges., Ew., Hitz. Del., Naeg.

note. }

Long ago] in the counsels of eter-
nity, see on xxii. II.

*7 Became grass] So king As-
surnacirpal, ‘Kings. . . he cut off
like grass’ (R. P., iii. 41).

8 But thy sitting down. . .]
The connexion is, ‘But I will not
allow thee to go a step beyond the
goal marked out by me. I scru-
tinize every movement of thine’—
The opening of this verse is logi-
cally unsymmetrical, probably be-
cause to insert ‘and thy standing
up’ would have made the clause
disproportionately long.

* My hook ... my bridle]
No mere symbolical expression, as
the Assyrian bas-reliefs show. The
‘hook’ in the nose is indeed un-
usual, though not quite unexampled
in Babylonian sculpture (comp.
Ezek. xxxviii. 4, 2 Chron. xxxili.
11,Q.P. B.). The ‘bridle’ is the
thong or rope by which the more
distinguished captives were led
about. See Prof. Rawlinson, An-
cient Monarchies, ii. 304, iii. 436.

80 The sign] ‘The sign’ not of
what precedes, but of that which
follows (see on v. 32). The de-
parture of Sennacherib would be
the signal for a new and blessed
life in the church-nation of Jeho-
vah. ‘The hardly-earned exist-
ence of the Jews during the next

(See crit.

two years [rather fourteen or fifteen
months] is a pledge of the brighter
future in store; that is, of the
Messianic period’ (/. C. A., p. 105).
It is necessary to lay stress upon
this, otherwise it would be difficult
to see in what the ‘sign’ consisted,
or why it was necessary. The
‘sign’ consisted in the certitude of
the prophet that the danger from
Assyria was over, and the Messia-
nic period at hand. This certitude
implies a claim to supernatural
knowledge. ‘ The sudden flight of
Sennacherib to Nineveh could not,
of itself, put an end to all fear of a
fresh invasion, not even when the
terrible extent of the judgment was
known. It might seem unlikely
that a single check should wholly
turn back a tide of conquest and
plunder which had set in for thirty
years’ (Birks). Isaiah ventures, in
the face of this unlikelihood, to
assure the Jews that there will be
no repetition of an Assyrian in-
vasion. He even goes further, and
speaks as if the Messianic period
were close at hand. Without a vio-
lation of psychological laws, such
as we have no Old Testament ana-
logy for assuming, it would perhaps
have been impossible for him to
realize the long interval between
his own period and the ideal age ;

222

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XXXVII.

of itself ; but the third year sow ye and reap, and plant vine-

yards and eat the fruit thereof.

31 And the escaped of the

house of Judah who are left shall again take root downward
and bear fruit upward ; * for out of Jerusalem shall go forth

at any rate, it appears that, when
this prophecy was delivered, he did
not realize it. It is for these bold
assurances, of the close of the As-
syrian period, and the advent of
the Messianic age, that Isaiah
here offers a sign. The after-
growth] Lit., that which is added,
ie, the produce of the grains
which had dropped out by chance
at the last harvest. The word
(saphiakh) only occurs again in this
sense, Lev. xxv. 5, II. But the
third year] It may be asked why
the ‘sign’ should be postponed to
the third year. Some (Hitz., Knob.,
and formerly Del.) reply: (a2) Be-
cause the Assyrians would pass
through Judah on their return from
Egypt, and so the harvest of the
second year would be lost. Others
(e.g. Hofmann) (4) suppose that the
first year was sabbatic, the second
a jubilee year, and that on this
account the cultivation of the land
was to be suspended. But with
regard to (a), Consul Wetzstein has
pointed out that it is not necessary
to assume a second Assyrian in-
vasion. ‘If, for example, the break-
ing up of the fallow had to be
omitted in the winter of 1864-65
on account of the enemy, there
could be no sowing in the autumn
of 1865, nor any harvest in the
summer of 1866. .. If seed were
to be sown in the newly-broken
fallow, there would be no _ har-
vest, and the seed would be lost’
(Delitzsch, Fesaza, 1st ed,, p. 655).
And as to (4), the supposition is
really baseless. There is no evi-
dence that either the sabbatical
year or that of Jubilee was ob-
served before the Exile (comp.
2 Chron. xxxvi. 21), and the utmost
that can be maintained is a possible
reference (assuming its pre-Exile
composition) to the phraseology of
Lev. xxv. 5, 11. ‘Your condition
this year will be like that in a

sabbatical year, and next year like
that in a Jubilee year.—N.B. The
fact is, that the postponement of
tillage is not so great as might be
suppos#d. The prophecy was pro-
bably delivered in autumn (see on
xxxlil, 0), somewhat before the
close ot the civil year. ‘The second
year would thus be from one Tisri
(or October) to another, and this
would be the only year completely
lost to agriculture. In ordinary
language, then, the prophet assures
the Jews that within fourteen or
fifteen months the tillage of the
ground might be resumed. It isa
bright fancy of Del. to connect the
composition of Ps, Ixv. with the
spring of the third year, when the
fields which had once been laid
waste by the Assyrian soldiery
were once more covered with ripen-
ing corn.

31,82 The scanty population con-
centrated at Jerusalem shall again
spread over the land and repair its
losses. The escaped ...] A
characteristic reference to the great
doctrine of the ‘remnant.’ Comp.
iv. 2, 3, X. 20, 21.——Who are left]
The same pleonasm as in xi. 1, 16.
Take root downward. . .|
Thus reversing the judgment in
v. 24; comp. xxvii, 6. The
jealousy .. .] ‘Jealousy,’ being
the affectional manifestation of the
Divine holiness, is a ‘two-edged
word,’ implying the destruction of
all that opposes the Divine cove-
nant, and the furtherance of all
that promotes it—These words
form the close of the first great
Messianic prophecy (ix. 7). It is
a plausible conjecture of Hitzig’s
that vv. 33, 34, were added by a
later editor, the original prophecy
ending at v. 32. They certainly
appear to have been added later,
but why not by Isaiah himself?
They at any rate fit on to v. 29 better
than vv. 30-32. Hitzig’s real reason

CHAP. XXXVII.] ISAIAH. 223

0

a remnant, and those who escape out of mount Zion. The
jealousy of Jehovah Sabdoth shall perform this. *8 Therefore
thus saith Jehovah concerning the king of Assyria, He shall
not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor come
before it with shields, nor cast up a bank against it. ™ By
the way that he came, by the same shall he return, and into
this city he shall not come; it is the oracle of Jehovah.
% And I will shield this city to deliver it, for mine own sake,

and for my servant David’s sake.
36 And ¥ the angel of Jehovah went out, and smote in the

k 2 Kings xix. 35 inserts, It came to pass that night, that.

is the unusual definiteness of the
prediction in v. 34, which, he thinks,
isa Vvaticinium post eventum. True,
it agrees in its expressions with the
prediction in v. 7, but it contains
nothing to remind us of the state-
ment in v. 36.

33 Comp. xxxi. 8, Hos. i. 7—
With shields] ‘Shields’ were
needed against the darts and
stones, or the burning torches,
thrown out on the besiegers by the
besieged. See illustration from
Botta in Bonomi’s Vineveh and its
Palaces, p. 161.—WNor cast up a
bank] Habakkuk (i. 10) says of the
Chaldeans, ‘He laugheth at every
stronghold, and heageth up earth,
and taketh it.’

35 x will shield this city] Sept.
finely (also in xxxviii. 6) drepaome.
Or, shelter as a mother - bird
(xxxi. 5).

36 and the angel of Jehovah
went out...] (Comp. 2 Sam.
xxiv. 16, Acts xii. 23.) Commen-
tators of all schools seem to be
agreed in treating this Hebrew tra-
dition of the destruction of the
Assyrians with some freedom ; nor
can they be blamed, considering
the long interval between the events
and the Exile-period when the tra-
ditions were finally edited. Thus

Delitzsch feels justified by the con-
ciseness of the report in supposing
an epidemic of long duration in
the Assyrian host, comparing the
phrase of the Psalmist, ‘the pesti-
lence that walketh in darkness’
(Ps. xci. 6). Prof. Rawlinson,
following Thenius and apparently
Ewald, transfers (and rightly—see
below) the scene of the pestilence
to the marshes of Pelusium, on the
ground of the well-known Herodo-
tean narrative (Herod. ii. 141). Hit-
zig inclines to reject the words of
2 Kings xix. 35, ‘that night, asa
later addition to the original narra-
tive ; Delitzsch (ed. 1) thinks that
the terms of the promise in v. 30
forbid us to interpret the words
quoted in their most obvious sense,!
and explains them with reference
to vv. 33, 34, as = ‘in the night in
which the Assyrians encamped be-
fore Jerusalem.’ Finally, Hitzig and
Knobel refer the large number of
the dead to a legendary exaggera-
tion, The instances quoted of the
large ravages effected by plagues
will, however, not convince those
whose difficulty is not so much in
the great loss of life as in the large
number of what (supposing the
event to have happened before Je-
rusalem) can have been but a mere

1 Thenius, too, thinks, with much reason, that the words in question refer to some

notice which existed in the original source from which the editor of 2 Kings xix, drew,
but which he unfortunately omitted. He also conjectures that the statement of the
destruction of the Assyrians in a single night is a legend suggested by the words of
Isaiah in xvii. 14. If so, however, we should have expected that the instrument of
destruction would be a storm. This, in fact, has been suggested by the orthodox
Vitringa, though there seems to be no analogy for the use of ‘angel of Jehovah’
synonymously with ‘storm.’

22 ISAIAH. (CHAP. XXXvii.

camp of Assyria a hundred and cighty-five thousand; and
when men arose early in the morning, behold, they were all
dead corpses. 97 And Sennacherib, king of Assyria, broke
up, and went, and returned, and abode in Nineveh. 38 And it
came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of ! Nisroch

1 Nasarach (v. 1. Asarach), Sept.—Mesarach, Sept. of 2 Kings xix. 37.—Asshur,

Wellh., Schrader.

corps of the entire Assyrian army.
The Chronicler, too, simply states
that ‘ Jehovah sent an angel, who
cut off every mighty man of valour
and leader and captain in the camp
of the king of Assyria’ (2 Chron.
xxxil. 21). On the whole, although
we may admit that the compiler
may have believed the event to
have taken place before Jerusalem,
it is clearly the more probable view
(as it enables us to leave the num-
bers untouched) that the scene of
the pestilence was in the marshes
of Pelusium. The legend in Hero-
dotus presupposes a narrative much
nearer to the Hebrew, for the‘ mice’
are simply misunderstood symbols
of pestilence.1 It was pardonable
in the Egyptians to ascribe their
deliverance to the piety of their own
king. ——The camp of Assyria]
There was a place ‘ within the city’
called ‘the camp of the Assyrians’
in the time of Josephus (de Led/o
Jud., Vv. 7. 2); but ‘Assyrians’ here
may possibly = ‘Syrians,’ as in
Jos., Ant. xiii. 6. 7.

7 and Sennacherib...
broke up] This again must not
be taken too literally. The in-
scriptions show that Sennacherib
lived twenty years after the Egyp-
tian and Jewish expedition, and un-
dertook five more campaigns. All
these, however, were in the east,
north, or south of the empire, and
were therefore as good as non-
existent for nations in the west,

like the Jews. Among them were
several against Babylonia —not
against Merodach Baladan, who
had been dethroned, but against
his son, Nabu-sum-iskun, whom
Sennacherib captured alive (Schra-
der, A. A. T., p. 329).

88 Murder of Sennacherib. Un-
fortunately we have no Assyrian
account of this; an inscription of
Esarhaddon which may have re-
ferred to it is fractured in the im-
portant part. The following passage,
however, is very suggestive: ‘From
my heart I made a vow. My liver
was inflamed with rage. Imme-
diately I wrote letters (saying) that
I assumed the sovereignty of my
father’s house’ (A. P., iii. 103, Tal-
bot). In the next lines Esarhad-
don apparently describes his con-
test for the empire with his brothers,
and places the scene of it in the
land immediately south of Arme-
nia.—-Nisroch his god] This
name cannot be identified in the
Assyrian pantheon, though M. Op-
pert formerly read Hea (the Air-
god) as Nisroch,? an error which
has been copied by Mr. Budge in
Rk. P., xi. 46, Attempts have been
made to explain the word Nisroch
(see Del. ad loc., and Schrader,
K. A. T., ed. 1, pp. 205, 206), but,
it seems to me, without success.
Beyond question Nisroch is a cor-
ruption, as perhaps Hana and Av-
vah in xxxvii. 13. Wellhausen
thinks the original source had

1 Wellhausen, Der Text der B. Sam. (1871), on 1 Sam. vi. 4. :
2 T observe that Prof. Schrader also in 1872 read Nisroch (Vsrv&) in an inscrip-

tion of Assurbanipal, where Mr, G, Smith, Aisfory of Assurbanipal, p. 4, rightly
reads Hea, on the ground that the sign commonly read A is now and then used (but
ideographically !) for xw'# (rather xwéu =‘ distant’) see K. A. 7., ed, 1, pp. 205-208.
M. Oppert, however, now reads A7z, with as little reason as Nisroch, as Mr. Sayce
kindly informs me. It is much to be wished that Assyriologists would contract. their
Ilebraizing of the proper names in the Assyrian inscriptions within as narrow limits
as possible,

CHAP. XXXVIIL]

ISAIAH.

225

his god, that Adrammelech and Sarezer his sons smote him
with the sword ; and they escaped into the land of Ararat.
And Esarhaddon his son became king in his stead.

Asshur (comp. Sept. above) ; Sayce
longagothought of Nusku,'a planet-
ary god=Nebo. The 7 might be
instead of an original duplication,
so that Nisroch would imply a
form Nussiiku. Wellhausen’s con-
jecture leaves the ck unaccounted
for. Adrammelech] i.e., the
Assyrian Adarmalik ‘(the god)
Adar (is) prince.’ In 2 Kings xvii.
3t this is the name of a god of
Sepharvaim (see on xxxvil. 13);
in this case translate ‘Adar—prince.’
Sarezer] i.e, Sar(ra) - ucur
(=protect the king), a shortened
form of an Assyrian name, the first
part of which probably consisted
of the name of some god. It oc-
curs again, as the name of a man
of Bethel, Zech. vii. 2. The lack-
ing name is most probably Nergal?
(the lion-god), for Abydenus states

by his brother Adramelos (Adram-
melech), the latter being in his
turn put to death by Axerdis (Esar-
haddon). Nergalsarezer occurs as
a proper name, Jer. xxxix. 3, 13.
It means ‘Nergal, protect (or,
created) the king,’ Ararat] i.e.,
Armenia, in Assyrian Urartu, which
lay just beyond the limits of the
Assyrian empire or influence.
Esarhaddon] The Hebraized form
of Asur-akh-iddin, ‘Assur gave a
brother.’ Notice the later mode of
transcribing the name Asur in
Hebrew.

As the Assyrian eponym Canon
requires us to date this king’s ac-
cession in 681 B.c., a presumption
arises that the compiler of this
chapter was not Isaiah, who in 681
would be almost 100 years old.
Del. admits this with regard to

that the successor of Sinecheribos

vv. 37, 38, but why should he stop
was Nergilos, who was murdered

there ?

CHAPTER XXXVIII.

THE dangerous illness of Hezekiah, the sign of his days being prolonged,
his recovery, his thanksgiving-psalm—such are the contents of this
chapter. There is a parallei narrative in 2 Kings xx. 1-11, which is evi-
dently much nearer to the original on which both it and Isa. xxxviil. are
based ; together with Delitzsch I regard the latter as having been once
as full of details as the former, or with most critics as the work of a hasty
copyist. In fact, Isa. xxxviii. in its present form may be considered as
virtually an abridgment of 2 Kings xx. 1-11 (see notes). The date of the
events described is settled by v. 6. Since, according to 2 Kings xviii. 2,
Hezekiah reigned twenty-nine years, his illness must have occurred in his

1 Essay on Isa. xxxvi -xxxix , in 7%eological Review, 1873, p. 27.

2 I see that this acute conjecture is sometimes ascribed to Schrader, who, however,
can well afford to give the credit of priority to a learned American, Dr. Joseph
Addison Alexander, the commentator on Isaiah (1846). Schrader well compares Bil-
sar-ucur = Belshazzar, and quotes nine other names shortened like Sarezer, e.g., Nabu-
habal-ugur=Nabopolassar. (Dée ass.-bab. Keilinschriften, 1872, pp. 154-6.) There
are equally good parallels in the Old Testament, e.g., Ahaz for Jehoahaz.

3 The haste with which he worked is shown by the misplacement of vv. 21, 22,
which were omitted by accident between wv. 6 and 7, and then restored at the end of
the chapter. We have noticed, it is true, a tendency to abridgment throughout this

group of narrative chapters. but in chap. xxxviti. the tendency is carried to an ex-
treme 2rd combined, in the case just referred to, with carelessness.

VOL. I. Q

226 ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XXXVIII.
fourteenth year, and have synchronised, or nearly so, with the invasion
of Sargon. Whether it preceded or followed the invasion, cannot, of
course, be determined with certainty. The mention of fifteen years in
uv. § suggests, however (as Bahr has remarked), that Hezekiah had finished
his fourteenth year and begun his fifteenth ; otherwise there is an appear-
ance of arbitrariness in the prophetic number.' In this case, the illness
of the king will fall after the invasion, and v. 6 must be a late and in-
harmonious insertion. That v.6 was added by the editor is confirmed by
the interruption which it causes to the context, an interruption which does
not occur in the parallel,and probably original, passage, xxxvii. 35. The
probability is that the latest editor, in whose time the invasion of Sargon
was forgotten, made Hezekiah’s illness coincide more or less exactly with
the invasion of Sennacherib. On this assumption, his insertion of v. 6
becomes intelligible.

‘In those days Hezekiah became sick unto death. And
Isaiah the prophet, son of Amoz, came unto him and said
unto him, Thus saith Jehovah, Set thine house in order, for
thou shalt die and not live. *And Hezekiah turned his face
unto the wall and prayed unto Jehovah, and said, Ah, Jehovah,
remember, I pray, how I have walked before thee in faithful-
ness and with a whole heart, and have done that which is good
in thine eyes. And Hezekiah wept aloud. ‘And *the word
of Jehovah came to Isaiah, saying, °Go and say to Hezekiah,
Thus saith Jehovah, the God of David thy father, I have

» 2 Kings xx. 4 inserts, Before Isaiah was gone out into the middle court.

2 wnto the wall] So, in a dif- — xxxiil. 7.

ferent spirit, Ahab, 1 Kings xxi. 4.
Compare Lowth’s note ; he points
out that Hezekiah’s couch was pro-
bably placed in a corner, which is
the place of honour in the East.

3 How I have walked... ]
Contrast Hezekiah’s former prayer
(xxxvii. 16 &c.). This is a reason
for his seeming egotism on this
occasion. An early death was the
penalty of ungodliness (Ps. lv. 23,
Prov. x. 27), and Hezekiah knew
that he had been faithful to his
God. Hence he can appeal, like
Abraham, to the Divine justice.
A whole heart] i.e., one not
shared between rival deities, 1 Kings
xl 4. wept aloud] Comp. on

4 According to 2 Kings Heze-
kiah’s death-warrant was suddenly
cancelled (if we may use the phrase),
before the prophet had reached the
outer court of the palace. A striking
instance of the conditionalness of
prophecy. As Jerome says (on
Ezek. xxxiii.), ‘Nec statim sequitur,
ut, quia propheta przedicit, veniat
quod praedixit. Non enim preedixit
ut veniat, sed ne veniat.’?_ Generally
it is repentance which leads to a
revocation of Jehovah’s threaten-
ings; here it is the prayer of a
righteous man, who was to be
taught that such prayer ‘availeth
much.’

5 Fifteen years] See Introd.

1 [admit that this view makes the fifteen years added to Hezekiah's life incom-

plete, the first year being fragmentary.
of periods.

But it is the Hebrew way to count fragments

2 Quoted by Oehler, Theology of the Old Testament (Eng, Transl.), ii, 361.

CHAP. XXXVIII.] ISAIAH. 227

heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears: behold,” I will add
to thy days fifteen years. ® And I will deliver thee and this
city out of the ‘hand of the king of Assyria, and I will shield
this city.4 7And this shall be the sign unto thee from
Jehovah, that Jehovah will do this thing which he hath spoken:
Se Behold, I will turn the shadow of the steps over which ‘the
sun hath gone down on the step-clock of Ahaz, ten steps
backward. So the sun returned ten steps on the step-clock,
over which (steps) it had gone down.®

b 2 Kings xx. 5 inserts, I will heal thee; on the third day thou shalt go up into
the house of Jehovah ; and.

¢ Lit., palm of the hand.

4 2 Kings xx. 6 adds, For mine own sake and for David my servant's sake.

e 2 Kings xx. 9, ro reads, Shall the shadow go forward (?) ten steps, or shall it go
back ten steps? And Hezekiah said, It is a light thing for the shadow to decline ten
steps ; nay, but the shadow shall go back ten steps. And Isaiah the prophet called
unto Jehovah, and turned back the shadow over the steps which it (?) had gone down
on the step-clock of Ahaz ten steps backward.

f So Olshausen, after Sept., Pesh., Targ., Vulg. -TExT has, It (?) hath gone down
by reason of the sun.

(like the dial, an invention of the
Babylonians), but rather for parts
of hours, for otherwise there would

® See Introd., and note on xxxvii.

35.
8 The step-clock] Lit. the steps.

There is no doubt that this phrase
means some kind of clock, but what
kind, is uncertain. Herodotus (ii.
109) states that the sun-dial was
the invention of the Babylonians,
and this may perhaps be intended
here :—in this case, render above
‘the shadow of the degrees.’ But
it is rather simpler to suppose the
clock to have consisted really of
‘steps’ leading up to a pillar, the
shadow of which was employed as
a measure of the progress of the
sun. In either case, we must sup-
pose the clock to have been ar-
ranged, not for the twelve hours

vv. 7,8. The sign of the sun’s shadow.

not have been space for the shadow
to rise or to fall ten steps or degrees
equally well. Probably Isaiah is to
be understood as speaking about
mid-day. It is possible, too, that
the motion of the shadow could
be observed from the chamber in
which Hezekiah was lying. This
would make the choice of the sign
particularly appropriate. Its ideal
significance is, of course, that Je-
hovah would put back the life-clock
of Hezekiah and of the nation, ar-
resting the downward course, of the
one towards death, and of the other
towards political ruin.

In 2 Kings this is given with

a fuller introduction, and Hezekiah is represented as deliberately choosing
that the sun’s shadow should ‘go back’ on the ground that its ‘going
forward’ would by comparison be ‘easy.’ ‘Easy’ must here mean
‘easy to conceive,’ for, of course, both occurrences would be equally
extraordinary; but the ‘going forward’ of the shadow ten degrees would
in fact only differ from everyday experience in its rapidity. The hypo-
thesis that the phenomenon was due to a solar eclipse formed one of the
assumptions of the chronological theories of the late Mr. Bosanquet
(7. S. B. A,, iii. 36). But, however plausible, it has to be rejected, as the
description clearly presupposes a local phenomenon (comp. 2 Chr. xxxii.
31). Ewald suggests that the entire narrative is built upon a misunder-
Q2

228 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XXXVIII.

stood poetical expression, comparing Josh. x. 13. The parallel is not
complete, for in Josh.x. 12 the poetical fragment which was misunderstood
is actually preserved, whereas even the word ‘shadow’ does not occur in
the Song of Hezekiah. But another poetical passage on Hezekiah’s
sickness may easily have perished in the /¢erary catastrophe of the Exile,
and the Song of Hezekiah is very possibly (see below) a late composition,

9 Writing of Hezekiah, king of Judah, when he had been
sick, and was revived from his sickness.

vv. 9-20. The Song of Hezekiah, which is not found in the parallel
narrative in 2 Kings, is a sweet and plaintive specimen of Hebrew
psalmody, though from its conciseness of expression by no means free
from difficulty.!| Zwingli the Reformer, who had occasion in his life to
apply it to his own case, hardly does it justice by the epithets ‘cum primis
doctum et elegans.’ It is certainly deficient in originality, but it is at any
rate a sympathetic reproduction of thoughts and expressions which can
never become commonplace. In the melancholy tone of its contempla-
tion of death, it reminds us partly of the Psalms (see Ps. vi. 5, xxx. 9,
Ixxxvili. 10-12, xciv. 17, cxv. 17), partly of the Book of Job (e.g., chap.
xiv.) :—the latter book, indeed, seems to have influenced, not only the
tone, but even the selection of images and of phraseology in the Song.
The proof of this has been given by Delitzsch, who infers from this
relation of the two works that to ascribe a later date to the Book of Job
than the age of Solomon is henceforth an impossibility.» As specimens
of the close stylistic affinity between our Song and the Book of Job, take
“the gates of Shedl,’ v, 10, comparing ‘the gates of Death,’ Job xxxviii.
17 ; the image of the body as the house of the soul, v. 12, comp. Job
iv. 19, 21 (in the latter passage the soul is compared to a tent-rope) ;
that of death as the cutting off of the thread of life, v. 12, comp. Job
vi. 9, xxvii. 8 (Q. P. B.); and of God, when He afflicts man, as a lion,
v. 13, comp. Job x. 16. Compare, too, the image of the weaver’s shuttle
in Job vii. 6. For the scattered phraseological parallels, see notes on
uv. 12, 14, 15, 16.

The Song is called a Miktabh of Hezekiah (v. 9). Some would include
it among the Psalms ‘with artful terms inscribed’ (Milton). So eg.
Gesenius, who supposes / and m to be interchanged, so that A/7ktabh
=Miktam. But the roots a/habh and katham do not appear to be inter-
changed, so that it would be better to suppose 4% in ALiktadh to be a
corruption of the # in Akfam. But even this is hardly more than
plausible, since the context leads us to expect an emphatic statement ot
the authorship of Hezekiah. The literary character here attributed to that
king is in harmony with the fact that a collection of Solomonic proverbs

1 Klostermann’s attempt to explain difficult words by peculiarities of pronuncia-
tion seems to me generally mistaken. (Studien und Kritiken, 1884, pp. 157-167.)

2 Drechsler, Der Prophet Fesaia, ii. 2, pp. 220, 221 (Anhang or Appendix, by
Delitzsch). We must first of all, however, settle the question of date. Besides the
argument from the unoriginality of the Song in phraseology, an inference unfavourable
to an carly date may plausibly be drawn from the apparent allusion in v, 20 to a fact
only supported by the Chronicler.

CHAP. XXXVIII.] ISAIAH.

229
is ascribed to the zeal of Hezekiah (Prov. xxv. 1), as well as the revival
of the liturgical use of the Psalms of David and Asaph (only indeed in
2 Chr. xxix. 30).

Of course, however, we must receive the statement of the heading with
some degree of hesitation, knowing the inaccuracies which abound in the
headings of the Psalms. The Song is so full of reminiscences, that it
may perhaps, like the Psalm of Jonah, be not earlier than the Exile or
even post-Exile period, when the study of the written Word weakened
the impulse to original composition.

Four stanzas or strophes are pointed out by Ewald (I. vv. 10-12, II.
vu. 13, 14, ILI. vv. 15-17, IV. vv. 18-20).1_ In the two first the poet
recalls his despairing condition immediately before the Divine promise of
recovery reached him ; in the two last, he revels in the joy and gratitude

called forth by the re-creating word of Jehovah’s prophet.

There is no

reference to the ‘sign’ of the ‘step-clock,’ a remarkable omission, as to

which see note on wv. 16.

10T said, ‘€In the noontide® of my days must I depart
into the gates of Sheol; I have been mulcted of the residue

of my years.’

TJ said, ‘I shall not see "Jah in the land of

8 Lit., in the stillness, or pause.—In dimidio, Vulg. (similarly Pesh.).—In the

height (i.e., zenith), Sept.
h So one MS. (de Rossi).

One MS. of Kennicott and one of de Rossi read,

once, Jehovah, and Jerome states that this was the reading in his Hebrew MS.
Pesh., The Lord; Sept., The salvation of God (comp. xl. 5, Sept.).—TExtT, Jah ;
Jah.

10 In the noontide of my days]
Midway in life to Hezekiah, as to
Dante, came his peril of death.
‘ Noontide’ he expresses poetically
by ‘pause’; it is the time when the
sun appears to stand still in the
zenith. He has now outpassed by
four years the middle of the period
assigned by the Psalmist (Ps. xc,
Io) to human life, but it is still
noontide in his consciousness, when
the sudden blow falls.—To some
this appears a farfetched explana-
tion, but in Josh. x. 12 we have the
famous command, ‘Sun, in Gibeon
be still” for ‘stand still. The al-
ternative is to take ‘in the stillness
of my days’ =‘ when my days were
gliding quietly along, with reference
either to the withdrawal of the As-
syrians, as Ges. (which is probably
against chronology), or to the ‘even
tenor’ of a healthy life, as Del.
The meaning adopted above, be-

1 See Ewald, Die Dichter des alten Bundes, i. 1, pp. 161-165.

sides being highly poetical and in
perfect accordance with chronology,
is favoured by the expression ‘ the
residue of my days’ at the end of
the verse. The gates of Shed1]
The Assyrians, too, like the He-
brews, represented their Hades as
an underground city or fortress.
‘Seven walls encircle it, each with
its gate and porter, its outer wall
being a watery moat’ (comp.
Acheron); Boscawen, 7. S. B. A.,
iv. 290. Comp. ‘the gates of
Hades,’ Matt. xvi. 18, and ‘the gates
of Death, Ps. ix. 13, cvil. 18, Job
Xxxviii. 17; and see note on v. 14,
xiv. 9.

-E shall not see Jah... |
Comp. i. 12. There ‘to see Jeho-
vah’s face’ was a purely imaginary
seeing, identifiable with formal at-
tendance in the sanctuary. Here
it is the seeing of experience, as
in that vigorous aposiopesis of the

The reader will look

in vain for the Song in the great critic's rearrangement of the Rook of Isaiah in his

work on the Prophets.

ISAIATI, [CHAP. XXXVIII.

230
the living ; I shall behold men no more with dwellers in the
‘world’ '®*My habitation* is plucked up and carried off
from me like a shepherd’s tent; 'thou hast cut off, like a
weaver, my life ; from the warp did he sever me: from day
to night thou wilt make an end of me.

%3™T cried out for help™ until the morning—as a lion did
he break all my bones: ‘from day to night wilt thou make

! So several MSS. (including Cod. Bab.), Saad., Olsh., Ew., Hupfeld (on Ps, xvii.
14), Del. (second ed.), Bi.—Hebr. text has, Cessation, i.e., the land of Cessation (of
activity). Two letters are transposed.

* So Ges, Del., Naeg.—My time (i.e., life-periud), Ew., Kay.

' So Furst.- TExtT, I have cut off, Vitr., Ge. (comm.), Hi. ; I have rolled up, Ew.,
Del., Naeg. (Vulg., preecisa est). For change of person, comp. xxxvi. 5,

™ So Targ., Lowth, Hupfeld (on Ps. cxxxi. 2), Knob, Gr.—Hebr. text, I smoothed
down (my soul??), Ges., Del., Naeg. ; or, I thought (?), Ew., Kay. Vulg. ‘sperabam

usque ad mane.’

psalmist (Ps. xxvii. 13), ‘If I did
not believe to see the goodness of
Jehovah in the land of the living !’
The Sept. translator sought, charac-
teristically, to conceal the anthro-
pomorphism (comp. crit. note on i.
12).——-14n the land of the living]
Implying that ‘the goodness of
Jebovah’ is not to be ‘seen’ or ex-
perienced in the Underworld (comp.
vu. 18, 19).

2 My habitation] The word is
not common in this sense (see crit.
note), but the poet is also a master
of language, and prefers uncommon
to familiar expressions. The rend.
‘age’ cannot be legitimated philo-
logically ; also it hardly accords
with the verbs which follow, though
we do find the idea of time ma-
terialised as it were in Ps. xxxix.
5 (6), Matt. vi. 27 (Q. P. B.)
Is plucked up] i.e., is as good as
pluckedup. The figureis taken from
the nomadic life, comp. xxxiil. 20.
Besides Job iv. 21, comp. Ps. hii. 5
(2.P.B.), 2 Cor. v. 1, 4, 2 Pet. i. 13,
14. Carried off] As if into exile.
Thou hast cut off] i.e. wilt
certainly cut off. The pointing of
the received text makes this clause
inconsistent with the next, in which
Jehovah is the weaver, Another
Chaldaism is nothing surprising :
‘rolled up,’ too, is merely an in-
ferred sense. If however we retain
the text-reading, this is the best
meaning to give toit. In this case,

Hezekiah says, ‘I regard my life as
already ‘rolled up” and done with,
so near is the prospect of death,’
Did he sever me] Thespeaker
shrinks from naming God as the
author of his calamity, comp. Job
iil. 20 (Ew.). The same word is
used in Job vi. 9, and, in a different
conjugation, Job xxvii. 8. From
day to night] He expects this
severe illness to run its course ina
single day. Comp. Job iv. 20.

’ I cried out ror help] So, in
accordance with usage (see Ps. xxx.
2, Ixxxviiil. 13), and not merely ‘I
cried out’ (comparing Ps. xxxvili. 9,
Job iii. 24, where the phrase is dif-
ferent), we must render shzvva‘di.
The sick man appeals against the
fate which threatens him, appeals
—to whom? To God (comp. v. 3)
—to God against Himself ; to the
essential mercy, against the appar-
ent cruelty, of Jehovah. So again
in v. 14. It is the characteristic
irony of faith, In Dr. Mozley’s
words (£ssays, i. 217), ‘The appar-
ent doubt only expresses more
strongly the real faith ; the protest
against injustice and harshness, the
sense of absolute goodness and in-
effable mercy. —The rend. of Del.,
Naeg., &c., based upon the text-
reading, requires us to suppose an
unnatural ellipsis. Ps. cxxxi. 2,
which is quoted in its favour, is not
really favourable, for there we read,
‘IT have smoothed sy soz/,) without

CHAP, XXXVIII.]

an end of me?’

ISAIAH.

231

4 Like a swift, (like) a crane, did I scream;

I did moan like a dove ; mine eyes "looked languishingly to-
wards the height"; Jehovah, ° be careful for me,° become my

surety.

n Or, Longed heavenwards.
© So Klostermann (see crit. note), —TextT, I am oppresse 1.

any ellipsis. It is, moreover, quite
opposed to the context, which by
no means indicates patience as a
quality of the speaker. The ana-
logy, too, of ‘I said’ in wv. 10, 11,
suggests some similar introduction
to the vehement exclamation which
follows. —— Until the morning]
His illness did not run its course
so quickly as he had expected. He
is still alive the next morning, but
cannot expect, as the second half
of the verse declares, to outlive this
second day. As a lion] The
accents connect this with the pre-
ceding words, but here, as in other
instances, the necessities of rhythm
have led to a violation of logical
sequence. Comp. Job x. 16.

14 Bike a swift (like) a crane
. The conjunction of these
two kinds of birds is remarkable,
as their notes are in most respects
very different, though not more
different than those of the bear
and the dove, which are conjoined
as similes for groaning in lix. IL.
The note of the swift (a bird of the
swallow-tribe) is shrill, that of the
crane is resonant but deep. One
single verb is used zeugmatically
for both; the Hebr. (¢z/é/) pro-
perly signifies a shrill but pene-
trating sound, and is therefore more
applicable to the stridulous cry of
the swift than to the deep, trumpet-
like blast of the crane. Both notes,
however, agree in their penetrating
quality, and the zeugma in ‘did I
scream’ is not more striking than
others. The swift and the crane
are both mentioned again together
with the turtle-dove by Jeremiah
(viii. 7) with reference to their mi-
gratory habits; this suggests that
the sacred poet is here alluding to
the cries which the two former
birds emit in setting forth on their

migrations.—The word for ‘did I
scream’ is in viii. 19, ix. 4 used of
the thin feeble voice natural to
ghosts and assumed by necroman-
cers, and in x. 14 at any rate con-
notes feebleness of sound. On this
some critics have based an objection
to rendering ‘agdér by ‘ crane,’ but
wrongly ; for the note of the swift
as well as of the crane is described
as loud. It must therefore be the
quality and not the strength of the
notes of these birds which is re-
ferred to; in fact, the penetrating
quality mentioned above. (On the
note of the swift, see Wood’s ///us-
trated Natural History: Birds, p.
131; on that of the crane, see the
samework, p.671,and Encyclopedia
Britannica, ninth ed., vol. vi. p. 546.
The peculiar note of the crane is
ascribed to the unusual formation
of its trachea.) —— Mine eyes
looked languishingly ...] A
half-despairing look is for some
time all that he is equal to.—This
is not to be taken as the turning-
point in the speaker’s sufferings
(Naeg.), as if he only now ventured
to appeal to Jehovah; the three
first clauses in v, 14 are co-ordi-
nated. Hezekiah has all along fixed
his hope on Jehovah (comp. on be-
ginning of v. 13), though it only
now forces for itself an utterance.
The height] Where Jehovah
dwells, xxxiii. 5, lvii. 15. Be-
come my surety] The sick man
thinks of his prototype Job, who,
after very similar complaints, makes
the very same petition (Job xvii. 3,
comp. Ps. cxix. 122). The image
is that of a debtor who is being
carried to prison (Matt. xviii. 30).
But what a deep thought is involved
here in the application! For He
who is asked tointerpose as a surety
is, in Hezekiah’s case, at the same

239

What can I say?
himself hath performed it!

Pin spite of ® the bitterness of my soul.

ISATAII.

(CHAP. XXXVIII.

He both promised unto me and
I shall walk at ease all my years

'®O Lord, by such

things (?) men live, and 4altogether in them (?) is the life of

my spirit 4;
live.

and so thou wilt recover me, and *make me to
7 Behold, * for (my) welfare was it (so) bitter to me,

Pp So Ew.—Because of, Naeg.; (which shall follow) upon, Del.

4 Therein hath everyone the life of his spirit, Ew. (reading ‘his’ for ‘ my’),

below.

See

t This translation is reached either by reading a Tav instead of a Hé, or by taking
the imperative of Hebr, text as that of assurance, with Hitzig.

time the creditor. It is the irony
of the believer which we met with
above (v. 13).

1's Meantime an answer of peace
has been quickly sent. ‘What
can I say?] ‘I am at a loss how
to express my wonder and my
gratitude.” Comp. Gen. xliv. 16,
2 Sam. vii. 20. Promised] Al-
luding to the promise of Isaiah in
vu. 5-8. X shall walk at ease]
With leisurely pace, undisturbed,
as if in a festal procession ; comp.
‘And J will walk at liberty’ (ie.
freely), Ps. cxix. 45. It is not
necessary to suppose a_ special
reference to the processions of
worshippers to the temple (as Ew.,
Naeg.), in spite of Ps. xlii. 5, where
the same word occurs. It is the
‘walk of our life’ which is meant.
The same figure, which must re-
mind us of stately Italian pictures,
recurs in xxxv. 9 6, lv. 12 a@, with
reference to Jehovah’s ‘ freed ones.’
The root-idea of the very uncom-
mon Hebr. word (eddaddeh) is ‘to
impel’; this is qualified by the
reflexive conjugation. See Del. on
Ps. xlii 5, and comp. oles and
Criticisus, p. 18, All my years]
All my remaining years.

16 By such things... ] ‘Not
by bread alone doth man live, but
by everything which proceedeth out
of the mouth of Jehovah’ (Deut.
viii. 3, quoted by Ew.). Hezekiah
now has full confidence in Jeho-
vah’s power; ‘He speaketh and it
is done.” The sign asked for in vv.
7,8 is forgotten ; it was, in fact, a
symptom of spiritual weakness (vil.
11, comp. v9). ‘By such things,’

ie, such words as those of Jeho-
vah’s prophet, which carry with
them their own fulfilment (see on
ix. 8), men both come into existence
and are preserved alive.—This ex-
planation suits the context, but is
not free from objection, as the
Hebr. of the two first clauses of the
verse does not read naturally, and
is probably corrupt. Ew.’s con-
jecture (see above) is simple and
plausible, but the difficulty to me
lies in the two words which he
leaves untouched. And so thou
wilt... ] The application of the
general truth that God is the source
of all life to the particular case of
the speaker.

For (my) welfare... ] My
welfare, my true peace (peace and
welfare being equivalent ideas in
Hebrew), was the end for which
my trouble was sent. Comp. Job v.
17, 18. Was it (so) bitter to
me, (so) bitter] A repetition of
the same word, as in vv. 11, 18.
Perhaps the writer may intend to
suggest a second meaning—‘ mu-
tata est mihi amaritudo’ (see
note‘). Hast kept] The pro-
nunciation of the two rival read-
ings is very nearly the same (£Aa-
sakta—khashagta), but thatadopted
above is at once the more natural
in itself, and is supported by Ps.
Ixaviii. 50, and still more strongly
by Job xxxiiit, 18. According to
the text-reading (an error of the
ear as I venture to think, and due
perhaps to dictation) we have a
pregnant construction ; ‘hast loved’
=‘hast lovingly drawn,’ ‘as if the
love of God, shining on the soul,

CHAP. XXXVIIIL.] ISAIAH.

233
(so) bitter*; and thou hast tkept my soul from the pit
of destruction ; for thou hast cast behind thy back all my
sins.

8 For Shedl cannot give thanks to thee, Death cannot
praise thee ; those who have gone down to the grave cannot
hope for thy faithfulness: the living, the living, he can
give thanks to thee, as I do this day: the father to the chil-
dren shall make known thy faithfulness. °° Jehovah is ready
to deliver me: and my stringed instruments will we strike all

the days of our life in the house of Jehovah.
21 And Isaiah said,“ Let them bring a cake of figs, and

® My anguish is changed into ease, Lo., Gr.
t So Sept., Vulg., Lo., Ew., Kr,—Hebr. text has, Loved.

had made it ascend out of the
power of death’ (Kay). A similar
phrase in 2 Sam. xvili. 9 (Hebr.).
Hast cast all my sins... |
Such is the Divine magnanimity :
He forgives and forgets. A similar
figure for the pardon of sin in Mic.
vil. 19. The connection of the clause
(‘for thou hast cast’) is remarkable ;
Hezekiah evidently regards his peril
of death as the punishment of his
sins, see on v. 10.

18 Jehovah delighteth in praises ;
therefore he held back so praiseful
a servant from descending into
Shedl. She6l cannot give
thanks to thee... ] The form
of expression is mythological, as
Del. truly remarks ; the same con-
junction of Shed] and Death, per-
sonified on a mythic basis, meets
us in xxviii. 15, Ps. vi. 5 (‘hell’ and
‘the grave’ of A. V. should be
Shedl or the Underworld) ; comp.
Job xxviii. 22, ‘ Abaddon (or Perdi-
tion) and Death, Prov. ii. 18,
‘Death . .. the shades.’ Heze-
kiah is not, however, an uncon-
scious Nihilist ; death is not to him
the extinction of being. He believes
in a future state, but in one without
consciousness of God’s presence,
and consequently without moral
or intellectual energy. The dismay
with which he contemplates de-
parture from this world is a mea-
sure of the value he sets on per-
sonal communion with God:—such

dismay is (from a Christian point
of view) one element in God’s edu-
cation of the Jews for a final ‘ illu-
mination’ of ‘life and immortality’
(2 Tim. i. Io, in the Greek).

19 The living . . can give
thanks] Life, according to Heze-
kiah, is a constant succession of
benefits and thanksgivings. The
father to the children] We need
not ask (for we cannot possibly de-
termine the point) whether Heze-
kiah had any children at this time.
It is one of the familiar sentiments
of the psalinists which is here re-
iterated ; see Ps. xxii. 31, xxviii. 3, 4.

20 Es ready to deliver me] Or,
was ready; but, as the context re-
lates to the future, it is better to
suppose the poet to be taking a
hopeful prospect. Comp. xxxiil. 6,
‘a store of salvations.’ ‘Will we
Strike ... inthe house of Jeho-
vah] ‘The house of Jehovah’ may
be here a symibolical expression for
that communion with God which
the psalmists sometimes describe
in similar language (Ps. v. 7, xv. I,
xxili. 6, xxvii. 4). In this case ‘ we’
will mean the royal poet and his
family. But, more probably, Heze-
kiah identifies himself with the
Levitical musicians, in whom, for
the sake of the temple-service, he
took so deep an interest, 2 Chr.
xxix. 30.

21,22 ana Isaiah said... |
These facts are evidently out of

234

ISAIAH.

(CHAP. XXXIX.

let them bind (and apply it) to the boil, that he may recover."
*” And Hezekiah said, What is the sign "that I shall go up to

the house of Jehovah ¥?

u 2 Kings xx. 7 reads, Fetch ye a cake of figs; and they fetched and applied it to

the boil, and he recovered.

(In 2 Kings the equivalent of vv. 21, 22 stands imme-

diately after the prophetic promise of Isaiah.)
Y 2 Kings xx. 8 reads, That Jehovah will heal me, and that I go up to the house

of Jehovah the third day.

their place, a difficulty evaded in
A. V. by the inaccurate rendering,
‘For Isaiah had said.” The true
explanation was long ago seen by
Kimchi, and is well given by
Bishop Lowth on xxxvili. 4, 5. ‘The
narration of this chapter seems
to be in some parts an abridgment
of that of 2 Kings xx. The abridger,
having finished his extract here
with the 11th verse, seems to have
observed that the 7th and 8th
verses of 2 Kings xx. were wanted
to complete the narration ; he
therefore added them at the end of
the chapter, after he had inserted
the song of Hezekiah, probably
with marks for their insertion in
their proper places; which marks
were afterwards neglected by tran-
scribers. Or a transcriber might
omit them by mistake, and add
them at the end of the chapter with
such marks. Many transpositions !
are, with great probability, to be
accounted for in the same way.’
The ‘abridger’ did not, however,
in these verses, simply transcribe
the text of 2 Kings (or the still
earlier narrative on which 2 Kings
and ‘Isaiah’ may both be based).
The characteristic differences of

v. 21 make the original mistake of
its position somewhat less percep-
tible——aA cake of figs] Many
commentators suppose the figs to
be mentioned as a remedy current
at the time. But surely so simple
and unscientific a medicine would
have been thought of, without ap-
plying to the prophet, by those
about Hezekiah. The plaster of
figs is rather a sign or symbol of
the cure, like the water of the Jor-
dan in the narrative of Naaman
(2 Kings v. Io). The boil] ‘ Non
patet ex historia, cujus generis hac
fuerit inflammatio pestifera et le-
thifera, et difficile est id assequi
per conjecturam’ (Vitringa). Hitzig
and Knobel too hastily assume this
to be the plague-boil, and that the
plague is the same which probably
carried off the army of Senna-
cherib. But not only is this theory
against chronology (we are not yet
in the period of Sennacherib, see
Introd.), but the Hebrew word for
‘boil’? (s#hin) is used of various
kinds of eruptions (see e.g., Ex. ix.
9, Job ii. 7), but not of the plague-
boil.—Tnat he may recover]
The reading in 2 Kings is an an-
ticipatory notice, vil. i, xx. I.

CHAPTER XXXIX.

As we have already seen (p. 205), the embassy of Merodach Baladan
to Hezekiah is most naturally explained by referring it to the period
of the invasion of Sargon. That the illness of Hezekiah synchronises
with this event seems to be proved by the terms of the promise in

1 Gesenius (on vv, 7, 8) gives an excellent example of this transposition in Job
xxxi, 38-40, which evidently ought to stand a few verses back. (Merx places them
between vv. 32 and 33.) Other instances of the same kind are viii, 21, 22, Ps, xii. 7,
8, xxxiv. 16, 17, Prov. iv. 18, 79.

CHAP. XXXIX.] ISATAI. 235

XXxviii. 5, and the first verse of chap. xxxix. distinctly connects the
Babylonian embassy with Hezekiah’s illness. Sargon himself too, as al-
ready stated, lays great stress on the numerous embassies sent by
Merodach Baladan to the various kings opposed to Assyria. It is, how-
ever, a singular fact that Sennacherib, as well as Sargon, mentions the
trouble which he had with a king of Babylon called Merodach Baladan.
In the Nebbi Yunus inscription, for instance, after returning thanks to
Asshur, he at once passes to ‘ Marduk-bal-iddina, king of the land of
Gan-dunias’ (i.e., lower Chaldzea), of whom he says, ‘ The Chaldzeans
and Aramezans, with the army of Elam his help, like corn I swept ;
he, to the land of the sea, alone fled, &c.’!_ Hence Prof. Schrader, in
the first edition of his K. 4. 7. (1872), proposed to distinguish the
Merodach Baladan of Sennacherib’s annals from the king of that
name mentioned by Sargon, and to identify the former with the
Merodach Baladan of Isa. xxxix. There was some plausibility in
this suggestion. The repeated escapes and reassumptions of the
crown, which the theory of there being only one Merodach Baladan
during the reigns of both Sargon and Sennacherib compels us to
admit, were almost too romantic for a sober and sceptical historian ;
and, as a matter of fact, Merodach Baladan was not an uncommon
name of Babylonian kings. But even Prof. Schrader has been con-
verted to this view in his second edition, while M. Lenormant has all
along maintained the identity of the Merodach Baladans of Sargon
and Sennacherib. To the latter’s skilfully written ¢¢de I have already
(p. 209) referred the reader; one or two facts have since been added
by Mr. St. Chad Boscawen, from whom I borrow the following
supplement to my sketch of the historical circumstances of this group
of chapters.

‘From an inscription of the Assyrian monarch Tiglath Pileser II.
(W. A. I, ii. 67, line 26, obv.), it appears that the family of Merodach
Baladan ruled in southern Babylonia, on the shores of the Persian Gulf.
ln the inscription referred to, the Assyrian king stated that he received
tribute of Merodach Baladan, ‘son of Yakin, king of the land of the sea,’
that is, of the shores of the Persian Gulf. This district of the marsh-
land of the delta formed, for a period of many centuries, the place of
refuge for fugitive rebels against the Assyrians, and it was here that was
situated the province of Bit Yakin, the home of the tribe of Yakin; and
in B.C. 731, Tiglath Pileser exacted tribute from the then ruling prince,
Merodach Baladan.

‘On the overthrow of Shalmaneser III. by Sargon, or during the
years of weak rule, B.C. 725-722, when the Assyrian armies were chiefly
engaged in the siege of the important Syrian town of Samaria, and
consequently Babylonia was neglected, Merodach Baladan seized the
Babylonian throne... Sargon, having captured Samaria, made an ex-
pedition against the new occupant of the Babylonian throne, but does

1 Translated by Budge, R. P., xi. So.

2 Mr. Rodwell has translated an inscription of ‘Merodach Baladan III.," dated
about B.c. 1340 (2. P., ix. 29-36). See also the list of Babylonian kings prefixed to
G. Smith's Azstory of Babylonia.

230 ISAIAH, [CHAP. XXXIX,

not appear to have met with any great success ... In his twelfth
campaign, which took place in B.C. 710, the Assyrian monarch states
that he defeated Merodach Baladan, and forced him to flee to Cyprus ;
and after a long and victorious war in Babylonia, he states that, in the
thirteenth year of his reign as king of Assyria, he captured the city of
Su-an-na (an ancient name of Babylon), and proclaimed himself king of
Babylon, as well as of the Assyrian empire. This dualism of rule is
shown by a tablet, K 5280, which bears date as follows :—“ Registered at
Kalah (Nimroud), eponym of Bele, 13th year of Sargon, king of Assyria,
Ist year king of Babylon.” Thus the reign of Merodach Baladan ended
in his twelfth year, B.c. 710, and thus the monuments confirm the Canon
of Ptolemy.1| This is [further] confirmed by the dates found on some
small terra-cotta olives, now in the Louvre, which relate to the sale of some
women at Babylon... .

‘Though Ptolemy is no doubt correct in making the reign of Mero-
dach Baladan end in B.c. 710, it does not appear that he was killed until
some years after. Sargon assumed the government in Babylon in B.c.
709, and reigned five years, until B.c. 705, when he died, and his son Sen-
nacherib succeeded him as King of Assyria. On the death of Sargon,
the fugitive Babylonian monarch Merodach Baladan returned, and
attempted to seize the throne of Babylon. In this he was for a time
successful, but Sennacherib, in B.c. 704, drove him out of Babylon, and
forced him to fly to his old home among the marshes in the delta, to the
seat of his old kingdom of the sea-coast. Here, among his own people,
he was so well protected that he was not found by the Assyrian monarch.
Sennacherib then placed on the Babylonian throne a person called Bel-
ibni, who was the Belibus of the Canon of Ptolemy. This person reigned
two years, B.C. 703-702, having ascended the throne in the latter part of
B.C. 703. Now it is possible that, though defeated and dethroned,
Merodach Baladan never relinquished his claim to the Babylonian
throne, but counted his regnal years all the same from his accession in
BiG. 7220-5

‘On the death of Sargon and accession of Sennacherib, Merodach
Baladan raised a revolt in Babylonia, the expedition to suppress which
formed the first campaign of Sennacherib in B.C. 704-3. ... This had
the desired effect, in that the Assyrian king marched against Hezekiah
in his third campaign, and, having subdued him in his fourth campaign,
he defeats his southern rebels in the revolts of Suzdub and Merodach
Baladan,? This was in B.C. 701-700.

Accuracy of narrative in chap. xxxix, Two points at any rate
must be admitted—r. that there is a basis of tradition to the narrative
(Merodach Baladan could not have left Hezekiah out of his negotia-
tions) ; and 2. that the ideas which it enforces are those of the main

1 The Canon of Ptolemy is a chronological work, with astronomical notes, begin-
ning with the foundation of the middle Babylonian empire by Nabonassar in B.C. 747.
In spite of certain artificial arrangements, it is a valuable historical document, and
stands the test of comparison with the Assyrian Canon, See chap. v. of the late Mr.
George Smith's work, The Assyrian Eponym Canon (Lond., Bagsters, 1876).

2 «Babylonian Dated Tablets and the Canon of Ptolemy,’ by W. St. Chad Bos-
cawen (7. S. B. A., vol. vi, 1878, pp. 15-18).

CHAP. XXXIX.] ISAIAH.

Bay
current of the prophetic revelation. But there are also two points in
which a later colouring, due to the editor, may be suspected, however
unable we may be to arrive at a complete settlement of the question.
1. The leading political figure on the side of Judah is here the king,
whereas elsewhere the direction of the state is in the hands of ‘the
house of David,’ ‘the princes,’ ‘the men of scorn who rule this people’
(see notes on vii. 13, xxviii. 14-22, xxxil. 1), 2. The prediction of the
subjugation of Judah by the king of Babylon is, for several reasons,
unconnected with theology, not easily credible as an utterance of Isaiah
(see below on vv. 5-7).

1 At that time *Merodach Baladan, son of Baladan, king
of Babylon, sent a letter and a present to Hezekiah ; for he
had heard that he had been sick, and had recovered. * And
Hezekiah rejoiced because of them, and showed them his
storehouse, the silver, and the gold, and the spices, and the

® 2 Kings xx. 12 reads Berodach.
b Sept. inserts, And ambassadors.

1 Merodach Baladan] The He-
braized form of the Babylonian
Marduk-bal-iddina, i.e., ‘ Marduk !
gave a son ;’? comp. Nabu-bal-id-
dina ‘Nabu (Nebo) gave a son’—
another Babylonian name. In the
Canon of Ptolemy the former name
appears as Mardokempados, or, as
Ewald (History, iv. 187) corrects
the reading, Mardokempalados.
Son of Baladan] Baladan is
evidently a shortened form of Me-
rodach-Baladan, Nebo-Baladan, or
the like (comp. on Sarezer, xxxvii.
38). It is not, however, likely that
the father of this king bore the
same (or nearly the same) name:
the compiler appears to have fallen
into an error, What, then, was
his real name? Sargon calls his
Babylonian enemy ‘son of Yakin,’
from which most have concluded
that the father of Merodach Bala-
dan was named Yakin. Considering,
however, that Merodach Baladan
was the hereditary king of Bit
Yakin, it is more natural to sup-
pose that ‘Son of Yakin’ merely

(An error of the ear.)
So Lowth.

specifies the tribe to which the king
belonged, just as, in the narrative
referred to on xxxvii. 12, ‘Son of
Adini’ is a tribal appellation.”
For he had heard] Lit. ‘and he
heard’; appending the cause to
the effect, as 2 Sam. xiv. 5 (Del.).
In 2 Kings xx. 12, the simpler form
of expression, ‘for he had heard,’
is used.—Another ostensiblemotive
for the embassy is mentioned in 2
Chron. xxxii. 31, viz., ‘to enquire of
the portent that had taken place in
the land,’ i.e., of the phenomenon
on the step-clock. The real motive
was neither benevolence nor scien-
tific curiosity, but political foresight
(see p. 205). Hence the ‘present,’
v. I, comp. xxx. 6, So Josephus,
Ant. x. 2, 2.

* Because of them] i.e,, because
of the ambassadors; see note”.
Showed them his store-
house] The fact that Hezekiah’s
treasury is still full proves that the
Babylonian embassy must have
preceded the tribute to Sargon.
—-His armoury] See xxii. 8.-—

1 Marduk (Merodach) was originally a solar deity, but afterwards regarded as the

god of the planet Jupiter.

2 The famous ‘Jehu, Son of Omri’ (Yahua, Son of Khumri) must be explained

on these analogies ; Khumri (Omri) means the people of Pit Khumri, 1.e. of Samaria.
There 1s, therefore, no discrepancy between 1 Kings ix., which represents Jehu as the
founder of a new dynasty, and the Assyrian inscriptions. See Schrader, &. G. F.,
p. 207; Boscawen, 7. S. B. A., vi. 16.

238

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XXXIX.

fine oil, and the whole of his armoury, and all that was found
among his treasures: there was nothing in his house, or in
the whole of his dominion, that Hezekiah showed them not.
*Then came Isaiah the prophet unto king Hezekiah, and said
unto him, What have these men said, and whence come
they unto thee? And Hezekiah said, From a far country

have they come unto me, even from Babylon.
What have they seen in thy house ?

4 And he said,
And Hezekiah said,

All that is in my house they have seen: there is nothing

among my treasures which I have not showed them.

In the whole of his dominion]
The whole kingdom having been
taxed to keep up the stores of the
capital.

° ‘what have those men said
... ] Isaiah, with that fearless
assumption of a superior position
which we have noticed inchap. vii.,
at once challenges the king to ex-
plain his conduct. Jehovah's will
is opposed to all coquetting with
foreign powers (comp. xxx. 1). That
the ambassadors are still in Jerusa-
lem appears from ‘ ¢#ese men.’
From a iar country] ‘As though
he would make his hospitality seem
a duty’ (Strachey) : he could not
showthe door to strangers from such
‘afar land!’ Hezekiah does not
directly meet the suspicion implied
in Isaiah’s first question. He knows
denial would be useless, and would
bring upon him the woe denounced
on those who ‘deeply hide their
purpose from Jehovah’ (xxix. 15).

® and Isaiah said... ] The
prophet is evidently displeased with
Hezekiah ; but why? The Chro-
nicler says it is because the king’s
“heart was lifted up’ (2 Chron.
Xxxll. 25), i.e, on account of the
vanity implied in the king’s exhi-
bition of his treasures. This is no
doubt an important element of the
truth (comp. ii. 12-17). But was it
merely vanity which prompted the
king thus to throw open his treasu-
ries? Surely not. It was to satisfy
the emissaries of Merodach Bala-
dan that Hezekiah had considerable
resources, and was worthy of be-

> And

coming his ally on equal terms.
Isaiah, who saw so deeply into the
heart of his contemporaries, no
doubt read this in Hezekiah’s con-
duct To him, as a prophet of
Jehovah, the king’s fault was prin-
cipally in allowing himself to be
courted by a foreign potentate, as
if it were not true that ‘Jehovah
had founded Zion,’ and that ‘the
afflicted of his people could find
refuge therein’ (xiv. 32). His
punishment should be correspond-
ing to his sin. He thought to sub-
scribe his quota to a profane coali-
tion, and his treasures should be
violently laid hold upon by ‘wolves
in sheeps’ clothing.” Babylon had
solicited friendship ; she would end
by enforcing slavery. Calm and
dispassionate is the tone in which
the prophet speaks. Charles the
Great could not help weeping at
the sight of the Northmen’s vessels,
prognosticating the calamities which
those fell pirates would bring on
the flourishing coasts of the Franks.!
Jeremiah, himself a prophet, weeps
at the thought of the cruelty of the
Babylonians. But in Isaiah, con-
tentment with the perfect will of
God overpowers his emotional sus-
ceptibility ; and whether he wrote
chaps. xl.-Ixvi. or not, it must at
any rate be granted that he had
a profound conviction of the irre-
vocable election of Jehovah’s people
(see vi. 13). That conviction was
his stay in the prospect of tempo-
rary ruin for the kingdom of Judah.
(This is written on the assumption

1 Dr. Rowland Williams, Hebrew Prophets, 1. 429

CHAP. XXXIX.] ISAIAH.

239

Isaiah said unto Hezekiah, Hear the word of Jehovah Sabdoth:
6 Behold, the days are coming when all that is in thy house,
and that which thy fathers have treasured up, shall be carried

that the report of Isaiah’s words in
this chapter is in the main accurate.
Granting that he foresaw the Baby-
lonian captivity, I see nothing to be
surprised at in the tone in which it
is announced.)

6° Shall be carried away to
Babylon] A very striking circum-
stantial prediction. Ifwe could be
quite sure that it really proceeded
from Isaiah, it would represent the
highest point which that prophet’s
insight into the future attained,
since it distinctly asserts that, not
the Assyrians, then at the height of
their power, but the Babylonians,
shall be the instruments of the Di-
vine vengeance. There is no reason-
able doubt that this is what the pro-
phecy means. A few faint attempts
have, it is true, been made to show
that it points, not to the great
Babylonian exile, but to the cap-
tivity of Manasseh (2 Chron. xxxili.
11), which, though not referred to
in any known Assyrian inscription,
is now generally admitted to be
historically probable. The objec-
tion is twofold: 1. To make ‘king
of Babylon,’ in v. 7, equivalent to
‘king of Assyria’ (as one might
speak of the Prince of Wales under
his second title of Duke of Corn-
wall), weakens the force of the pre-
diction, for Sargon’s second title of
king of Babylon dates (see above,
p. 236) from the dethronement, in
B.C. 710, of Merodach Baladan,
whose embassy supplies the start-
ing-point of the narrative ; and 2.
even if Isaiah foresaw the assump-

tion of the crown of Babylon by
Sargon and Esar-haddon, still he
could not refer to this fact without
hopelessly mystifying Hezekiah.
‘The king of Babylon, in the pre-
diction here ascribed to Isaiah,
means the lord of that great world-
empire (to adopt a convenient hy-
perbole) which succeeded Assyria ;
and the use of this expression im-
plies that Isaiah foresaw the trans-
ference of power from Nineveh to
Babylon. To Ewald, such a degree
of foresight appears only natural,
‘inasinuch as that state [Baby-
lon], though often in dispute with
Nineveh, was yet by its peculiar
position .. too closely entwined
with Assyria, and it was really only
a question whether Nineveh or
Babylon should be the seat of uni-
versal dominion.’! Looking back
from the vantage-ground of history,
such an inference from the position
of Babylon may appear only natu-
ral, but I doubt whether it can be
called probable. The ‘question’
mentioned by Ewald had not yet
‘come within the range of practical
politics.’ Assyria had shown no
signs of weakness; Babylonia’s
ablest monarch, Merodach Bala-
dan, was on the verge of that
calamity which was announced in
solemn tones by Isaiah himself
(xxi. I-10). If the writer of xxi. 9,
Io did foresee the transference
of the centre of power, it can only
be called an extra-natural or super-
natural phenomenon.?

If Isaiah really uttered this pro-

1 History of Israel, iv. 188. _ Ewald continues: ‘It accordingly fashed like light-
ning across Isaiah’s mind that Babylon, attracted by those very treasures, &c., might
in the future become dangerous to that same kingdom of Judah which it was now
flattering. (One is compelled sometimes to abridge the involved sentences of this
great historical critic, but weak stylis'. )

2? Sir Edward Strachey, a thoughtful as well as reverent student of Isaiah, actually
holds that, both here and in xiv. 4, ‘king of Babylon’=‘king of Assyria.’ This
startling identification (see my remark above, p. 81) he defends by supposing that
‘ Babylon’ throughout Isaiah is ‘a monogram or ideograph’ (the figure will be clear
to those who know anything of the cuneiform method of writing) for the capital of the
Assyrian empire. ‘So,’ he remarks, ‘the Euphrates, not the Tigris, is the river which
is to overflow the land of Immanuel (vii. 20, viii. 7, 8); . . . Babylon, not Nineveh,
supplies the forces which besiege Tyre (xxiii. 13); and, to those who are content to

240

away to Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith Jehovah.

ISATAII,.

(CHAP. XXXIX.

7 And

of thy sons, who shall issue from thee, whom thou shalt beget,

phecy, 1 am willing to assent to
any reasonable inference from it,
but on several accounts it appears
to me improbable that he did so.
For (1) I can find no analogy for it
in the great age of prophecy. The
famous prophecy in Micah (iv. 10),
‘Bein pain, and labour to bring
forth, O daughter of Zion . . . and
thou shalt go to Babylon,’ is not a
parallel passage, for the context
shows that Babylon is mentioned
there only as a part of the As-
syrian empire (see Mic. v. 5, 6).
There is no way to avoid this
admission, except indeed the hy-
pothesis that the clause respect-
ing ‘going to Babylon’ is in-
terpolated. (See further, Last
I’ords, vol. ii.) (2) In xxi. I-10
Isaiah announces the fall of Mero-
dach Baladan’s kingdom of Baby-
lon. How can Hezekiah have
harmonised such apparently incon-
sistent predictions as the fall of
Babylon and the subjugation of
Judah by Babylon? Yet even if pre-
dictions be intended partly for fu-
ture readers, they are still primarily
addressed to the prophet’s con-
temporaries. Would Isaiah have
thrown his royal friend and disciple
into dire perplexity for the sake of
generations yet unborn? (3) As a
matter of fact, Hezekiah delivered
up ‘all the silver in the house of
Jehovah and in the treasuries
of the king’s house’ to Sargon (2
Kings xviii. 15). Why did not
Isaiah rather foretell this nearer
and more personal chastisement ?
By postponing Hezekiah’s penalty
so long, did he not run the risk of

shaking the king’s faith in his pro-
phetic mission? And how could
he have allowed Hezekiah to repose
on the thought that ‘peace and
steadfastness (or stability) should
be in his days,’ when so severe a
trial as Sennacherib’s invasion was
reserved for his old age?—I con-
clude, therefore, (while fully recog-
nising the complexity of the pro-
blem,) that the later editor has
given his own colouring (comp. on
Xxxvii. 20) to the vague tradition
which he may have received of
Isaiah’s prophetic condemnation of
Hezekiah’s intercourse with Mero-
dach Baladan. If any reader feels
disappointed at this result (which
implies that the Jews had not yet
discerned the full severity of the law
of truthfulness), it may be some
compensation to him that the an-
cient editor shows by this fictitious
(or nearly fictitious) prophecy that
he fully believed chaps. x1.-lxvi. to
be the work of the great Isaiah.
For he would never have given this
‘colouring’ which I have spoken
of to Isaiah’s reproof of Hezekiah
without some real or supposed
ground, This ground was the ex-
istence of a series of prophetic dis-
courses from the pen, as he believed,
of Isaiah, and intended for the
Jewish exiles in Babylon. If Isaiah
wrote those discourses which pre-
suppose the Captivity, he surely
must at some time or other have
predicted the captivity (criticism of
this elementary order is, 1 believe,
by no means so modern as some
suppose). What opportunity so fit
or natural as the reproof which,

take the text as it is, I may further quote the denunciations of Babylon in chap. xxi.
and the latter half of the book’ (Fewsh History and Politics, p, 168). But as to the
first set of passages, the Euphrates is there taken as a symbol of the Assyrian empire
(which, under Tiglath Pileser, included Babylonia), because it would have been un-
natural to speak of a more northerly river as overflowing into Judah. As to xviii, 13
(see my note), it isa mistake to suppose that the INasdim are pointed to as the de-
stroyers of Tyre: as to xxi, I-10, it is probably the independent kingdom of Merodach
Baladan, the ruin of which is announced (see pp. 126, 127); and as to the latter half
of the book, Sir E. Strachey stands alone in thinking (if he seriously does so) that the
real or assumed standing-ground of the prophet is any other than the Babylonian

captivity.

CHAP. XXXIX.]

ISAIAH.

241

shall they take away, and they shall become *chamberlains

in the palace of the king of Babylon.

8 And Hezekiah said

unto Isaiah, Good is the word of Jehovah which thou hast

spoken.
remain in my days.

And he said, 4 For peace and steadfastness? will

© Lit., eunuchs.
4 2 Kings xx, 19 reads, Surely [I may be content], if peace and steadfastness. ...

according (perhaps) to tradition,
he actually addressed to Hezekiah
for that unstable monarch’s co-
quetry with the Babylonian power?
(So that the tradition of the unity
of authorship can be traced back
as early as this editor of chap.
xxxix.)

7 And of thy sons who shall
issue from thee] It has been
questioned whether this means the
immediate offspring of Hezekiah,
or, more widely, his descendants.
Comp. xxxviii. 5, ‘David thy father ;’
and Gen. xvii. 6, ‘kings shall issue
from thee.’ In the latter case, the
phrase will refer to the descendants
of the king who should be alive
at the Babylonish captivity (comp.
Dan. i. 3, 4). This explanation
seems to me by far the more pro-
bable. It is favoured at once by
the form of the phrase (‘of thy
sons, implying that there was a
considerable number), and by Heze-
kiah’s expression of confidence in
the next verse that the prophecy
would not be fulfilled in his life-
time :—he could not be sure of this,
if the prophecy referred to his im-
mediate offspring.’

8 Good isthe word .. . inmy
days| The Syriac version connects
the two sayings of Hezekiah di-
rectly, omitting ‘and he said’:
‘Good is the word of Jehovah
which thou hast spoken, that there

1 So Hitzig, with his usual acuteness,

shall be, &c.; and this is at any
rate the sense of the second saying.
Hezekiah not only acquiesces in the
will of Jehovah, like Eli (1 Sam.
iii, 18), but congratulates himself
on his own personal safety. It
would no doubt have been the
nobler course to cry, ‘Me, me,
adsum qui feci, * and to beg that
he alone might bear the punish-
ment, as he alone had sinned.
But the principle of the solidarity
of the forefather and his posterity,
and of the king and his people,
prevails almost throughout the Old
Testament:—in Jer. xxxi. 29, 30,
and Ezek. xviii. we have apparently
the first revelation of a higher law
of morality. From the point of
view which the narrator rightly
ascribes to Hezekiah, that king
could not well speak otherwise than
he did (unless we assume a sus-
pension of the laws of psychology).
Even from a higher standing-ground
we must admit that he fails, not
by what he says, but by what he
omits to say. For it was a great
mercy that at least a respite was
granted both to the kings and te
the people of Judah. ‘Steadfast-
ness,’ i.€., continuance. There is
the same combination of words,
with the same sense, in Jer. xiv. 13;
comp. also Isa. xxxiii. 6. ‘In my
days,’ ie., as long as I live, comp.
Ps. cxvi. 2 (Kay).

2 It is tempting to quote the fine saying of David, ‘Lo, / have sinned, and / have

done perversely ; but these sheep, what have they done?’

(2 Sam. xxiv. 17.) But

unfortunately he continues, ‘Let thine hand, I pray, be against me and against my

father's house.’

VOL. 1.

242 ISATAH. [CHAP. XL.

CHAPTERS XL.-LXVI.

WE have now arrived at the most trying and yet most fascinating part
of our subject—the interpretation of the last twenty-seven chapters.
Sad it is that, from the only admissible point of view—the philological,
the problem of their date and literary origin still remains unsettled,
for until we know under what circumstances a prophecy was written,
portions at least of the exegesis cannot but remain vague and obscure.
Even the arrangement of the book (if it may accurately be called a
book) is by no means as clear as we could wish. On both these
points I will at least indicate what I conceive to be the present state
of the questions later, reserving a more complete discussion for a
subsequent work. In the following commentary I shall leave it an
open question whether the book was composed by Isaiah or by some
other author or authors, and whether it falls into two, three, or more
parts, but not whether it is in the fullest sense of the word prophetic.
Thold, with Dr. Franz Delitzsch, that ‘if we only allow that the prophet
really was a prophet, it is of no essential consequence to what age he
belonged’! ; and that, however limited the historical horizon of these
chapters may be, the significance of their presentiments is not bounded
by the Exile, but extends to the advent of the historical Christ, and
even beyond. I wish I could proceed with the same influential critic
to make the further admission that the standing-ground of the author
throughout his book is the latter part of the Babylonian Captivity,
and that ‘he is entirely carried away from his own times, and leads
a pneumatic life [a life in the spirit] among the exiles.’ If this were
only correct, it would greatly simplify the task of exegesis. Adhuc
sub judice lis est. A)\ that we can say is, that at least for a large part
of these twenty-seven chapters, it is generally admitted that the
prophet writes as if he were living among the exiles at Babylon, * when
the victories gained by Cyrus over the Medes and Lydians had
begun to excite the expectations of the Jewish patriots,’ ? and where
this is not so clearly the case the reader will find it candidly stated in
the notes.

The Book of Isaiah Chronologically Arranged contains a tolerably
full sketch of the line of thought, so far as it can be traced, through-
out the prophecy. It will be noticed that the exegesis in the present
work differs considerably from that in the former ; I have had, how-
ever, more to develope and to supplement than to retract. With
regard to the arrangement of the book, I cannot see my way to adopt
any of the current redistributions of the prophecies. Occasionally,

1 Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, ii. 138.
37, C.A., p. 141.

CHAP. XL.] ISAIAH. 243
no doubt, the chapters in our Bibles are evidently misdivided, and
here I have carefully noted the fact. But in the main I have
accepted the existing arrangement, without comment or criticism.
Some division of the book was necessary ; and, in default of scientific
accuracy, practical convenience seemed the first consideration.

Let us now approach with sympathetic minds this Gospel before
the Gospel. Though written primarily for the exiles at Babylon, its
scope is as wide as that of any part of the New Testament, and New
Testament qualifications are required alike in the interpreter and in
his readers.

CHAPTER XL.
Contents.—The prophet describes his commission (vv. 1-11) ; declares

the infinite perfections of Jehovah, and rebukes the stupidity of idolaters,
and the weak faith of Jehovah’s worshippers (vv. 12-31).

‘Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God. ?Speak
ye to the heart of Jerusalem, and call unto her, that her war-
fare is fulfilled, that her guilt is paid off, that she hath received

1 Comfort ye, comfort ye] The
theme, not only of chap. xl., but of
the whole prophecy which this
chapter introduces; comp. xxxv. 3,
4, xli. 2, The persons addressed
are the prophets (as the Targ.
already states at vw. 1), not the
priests (as Sept. interpolates in v.
2), for the next verse continues
‘Call ye’ (see below). The prophets
formed a numerous body, not only
in Isaiah’s time (iii. I, xxix. 10, 20),
but in the Babylonian exile (Jer.
xxix, I).——My people] No longer
‘Not-my-people’ (Hos. i. 9), no
longer ‘this people’ (see on vi. 9)
—both phrases implying Jehovah’s
temporary rejection of Israel ; but
again ‘ My people.’

2 Speak ye to the heart...
and call] A single, concise decla-
ration of God’s loving will was not
enough. The prophets are there-
fore told more distinctly still both
what they are to speak and how.
Their message is to be delivered
encouragingly (‘to the heart’) and
with a full clear note (‘call’). The
former phrase reminds us espe-
cially of Hos. ii. 16 (A. V. 14). ‘To
call’? is a synonym for ‘to pro-
phesy’; so in the Hebr. of lviii. 1,
Ixi, 1, 2, Zech. i. 14, Jon. iii. 2.

Mohammed, in the Kordn, con-
stantly uses the corresponding
Arabic word in a similar way ; e.g.
‘Call thou, in the name of thy Lord
who created’ (Sura xcvi. 1). The
prophetic announcement falls into
three parallel statements. Her
warfare] i.e, her enforced hard-
ships (there is a similar use of
guerra in Dante and Petrarca),
The metaphor is very suggestive
of the peculiar troubles of military
service in ancient times; comp. the
humorous Egyptian description
given by M. Lenormant, Azczent
History of the East, i. 315.
Notice here the first of a series
of parallels between II. Isaiah and
Job; see Job vii. 1, ‘ Hath not man
a warfare (i.e. a hard service) upon
earth ’—in Job xiv. 14 the phrase
has a rather different application.
——Her guilt] i.e., the penalty of
her guilt.——Zs paid off] Lit. is
satisfied. The sense is determined
by Lev. xxvi. 41, 43, comp. 34
(Q. P. B.). See note on li. 21.
That she hath received] This is
the historic perfect, as is clearly
shown by the parallelism. The
view of Ges., Hitz., Ew., that it is
a prophetic perfect, and stands for
‘she shall receive,’ is bound up with

R2

244

of the hand of Jehovah double for all her sins.

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XL,

3 Hark! one

that calleth : ‘In the wilderness clear ye Jehovah’s way, make
plain in the desert a highway for our God. ‘ Let every valley

a wrong interpretation of the closing
words of the verse. Double for
all her sins] It has been said that
this is a rhetorical hyperbole, de-
signed to set the compassionate love
of God in the clearest light, that God
condescends to accuse Himself, as
if He had been too severe. Others,
objecting to this ‘as if, illustrate by
the prophetic passages which assert
an over-severity on the part of the
heathen rulers of Israel (see xlvii.
6, Jer. 1.7, 11,17, Zech i. 15). Itis
simpler, however, to take ‘double’
in the sense of ‘amply sufficient ;’
comp. Jer. xvii. 18, ‘ Ruin them with
double ruin,’ Rev. xviii. 6, ‘ Double
unto her double according to her
works.’—Ges., Hitz, Ew. would
render ‘double (compensation) for
all her penalties,’ referring for the
rendering ‘penalties’ tov. 18 (where,
however, such a meaning is impro-
bable), and Zech. xiv. 19, and for
the idea to lxi. 7, Jer. xvi. 14-18?,
Zech, ix. 12, comp. Job xlii. 12. But
this is not favoured by the plural,
and is opposed by the context (see
last note).

3 Here begins a triad of invita-
tions, each containing three verses
(vv. 3-5, 6-8, 9-11).——Hark 1!
one that calleth] The second
message relates to something to be
done for Jehovah ; it is therefore
naturally ascribed to a non-divine
though still supernatural voice. The
poetic effect is much heightened
by the mystery. Comp. li. 9, lii.
1, lvii. 14, Ixii. 10, Similar voices
are spoken of in the Book of
Revelation (Rev. i. 10, 12, iv. I, x.
4, 8), and are to be explained on
these analogies. In the wil-
derness] Not to be joined with
‘one crieth’ (as Sept., Vulg., and
the Synoptic Gospels), for this
would spoil the parallelism of the

next line. The accents, too, are
against this conjunction.——Clear
ye ...] An allusion to the well-

known practice of eastern monarchs

on their progresses (see Bishop
Lowth). In the Synoptic Gospels
(Matt. ili. 3, Mark i. 3, Luke iii. 4)
the passage is taken metaphori-
cally of the preparation of the
heart (cf. Ps. Ixxxiv. 5, ‘highways
in their heart’), and so it must per-
force be taken, if the command is
addressed, as in vv. 1, 2, to the
prophets. The parallel passages
xlix. 11, Ivii. 14, xii. 10, cf. xxxv. 8,
are, however, opposed to this view,
and prove that we have here a
grand poetic symbol, introduced
to heighten the effect, and impress
the reader with the greatness of
the event. The pioneers, then, are
(not the tribes of the wilderness, as
Knobel thinks, but) supernatural,
angelic beings. In xxxv. 8 no
pioneers are mentioned :—the high-
way for the redeemed is one ‘not
made with hands.’ In the
desert] It is true, the ordinary
way from Babylon to Jerusalem, by
Damascus, Palmyra, Thapsacus,
for the most part went round, and
not through, the desert. It is the
importunity of faith which insists
on going the nearest way, in de-
fiance of all obstacles. There
seems to be also an allusion to the
journey through the desert at the
Exodus, Egypt being typical of
Babylon ; see xlviii. 21, hi. 12, cf.
xi. 16.—Del. rightly sees an allusion
to this passage in Ps. Ixviii. 4 (5) ;
see Q. P. B. Jehovah's way]
The return of Jehovah to Palestine
is a compendious expression for the
restoration of the exiles, and for the
renewal ofall the spiritual privileges
of which the Jews had been de-
prived. That this is the case is
shown by Ixii. 10, 11, in which, side
by side, we have the command to
make a road for ‘the people’ (i.e.,
the Jewish exiles), and a promise
word for word the same as xl. 108.
So, too, in lii 8 we have the return
of Jehovah mentioned alone, and
directly afterwards (v. 12), the re-

CHAP. XL.]

ISAIAH.

245

be exalted, and every mountain and hill be brought low, and
let that which is rugged become a table-land, and the ridges
a highland plain ; *and then shall reveal itself the glory of
Jehovah, and all flesh together shall see it: for the mouth of
Jehovah hath spoken it.’ ° Hark! one that saith ‘Call.’ And

8one said,* ‘What shall I call ?’

‘ All flesh is grass, and all

® I said, Sept., Vulg., Geiger.

turn of the hosts of Israel under
the generalship of Jehovah. There
is therefore no reason to infer with
Seinecke from passages like xl.
3-10, that Isa. xl.-Ixvi. was written
for those Jews who were left behind
by Nebuchadnezzar in Palestine.

5 All flesh shall see it] Comp.
Ps. xcvii. 6. The ‘seeing’ is two-
fold, as appears from the sequel
(see chap. Ix.). It is (1) the natural
sight of Jehovah’s glorious deeds
on behalf of his people, and (2) the
spiritual recognition of Jehovah as
the Lord. It is possible for Jeho-
vah’s Arm to ‘reveal itself’ and yet
for the spiritual eye to be closed to
it ; see lili, 1 (same word).

® and one said] viz., the prophet,
rapt by a vision out of his ordinary
self (comp. xxi. 6-9, 11, 12, 2 Cor.
xii, 2-4). Throughout his dis-
courses, the self-effacement of the
inspired author is very remarkable
(comp. on xlviii. 16 6).——.ANl flesh
is grass] It is doubtful whether
this and the next verse (or even
the next two verses) belong to the
questioner, or to the voice which
said, ‘Call.’ In the former case, the
preceding question is one of de-
spondency, and ‘All flesh is grass’
gives the reason of this despond-
ency :—‘ How can “all flesh” be
destined to see such a glorious
sight (v. 5), when it is subject to
the law of decay and death?’ To
this implied question, v. 8 may
be regarded as the answer. (So
Kay, who improves the sense by
taking ‘the people’ in v. 7 to mean
Israel.) This view is surely un-
natural. We cannot dispense with
some fresh tidings for the herald,
and the separation of v. 8 from
v. 7 is against the style of the

Book of Isaiah, in both parts of
which repetition of a phrase with
a slight addition or modification
is a favourite oratorical turn (see
Delitzsch, /sazah, E. T., ii. 134). I
therefore adhere to the ordinary
view, which regards vv. 6 0-8 as the
answer of ‘the Voice,’ who draws
an antithesis between the decay—
it may be, the premature decay (for
the breath of Jehovah ‘bloweth’
when ‘it listeth’)—to which even
the brightest and best of earthly
things are liable, and the necessary
permanence of Jehovah and his
revelation.—This is the first time
that the phrase ‘all flesh’ occurs in
the Book of Isaiah ; we meet with
it again in xlix. 26, Ixvi. 16, 23, 24,
also four times in Jeremiah, thrice
in Ezekiel, once in Zechariah (ii.
17), also repeatedly in the Penta-
teuch, and it would be well worth
while to examine the Pentateuch-
sections in which it occurs with
a view to illustrating their date.
Jeremiah and Deuteronomy (v. 23
Hebr.) are the only pre-Exile books
of absolutely certain date in which
the phrase is found. It would, how-
ever, naturally be employed in deal-
ing with subjects of universal, as
opposed to merely Jewish, interest ;
so that the question for decision is,
Was the present subject (whether
it be the Flood, or the fall of the
world-empires) a natural subject
for any particular inspired writer
to take up at the time to which he
is commonly referred >—Dr. Weir
makes the suggestive remark that
the sentence ‘All flesh is grass’ is
‘quite in the spirit of ii. 22’ (‘man
in whose nostrils is a breath’).
Unfortunately this does not greatly
confirm the Isaianic origin of the

246 ISAIAH. (CHAP. XL.

the grace thereof like flowers of the field. 7° Dry is the grass,
faded are the flowers, if the breath of Jehovah hath blown
thereon; surely the people is grass." Dry is the grass,
faded are the flowers, but the word of our God shall stand
for ever,’

°Get thee up on a high mountain, °O Zion, thou bringer
of good tidings*; lift up mightily thy voice, O Jerusalem,
thou bringer of good tidings ; lift it up, be not afraid; say
unto the cities of Judah, Behold, your God! ' Behold, the

> The whole verse is omitted in Sept.; the last clause only, by Koppe, Ges.
(doubtfully), Hitz., as a gloss. Comp. on ii. 22.
© O company that bringest good tidings to Zion, Sept., Targ., Vulg. (?), Rashi,

Ges., Kay.

passage before us, for the author-
ship of ii. 22 is open to grave doubt
(see my note ad /oc.).—It would be
impossible within reasonable limits
to treat every linguistic phenome-
non even briefly, but it seemed right
thus to draw the reader’s attention
to the important bearing which a
single word, or group of words, may
have on the literary problems of
the Bible. The grace thereof]
The word (£/dsed) nowhere else
has this meaning, but its synonym
(Ahén) has the double sense of
favour and grace or gracefulness.

7 Surely the people is grass]
The statement is resumptive.
‘Surely the human folk (comp. xlii.
5, xliv. 7) is as perishable as grass
(comp. Ps. xe. 5, 6). Israel and
Assyria are both politically extinct,
and Babylon is hurrying to its end.’
The thought is suggested, though
not expressed, that if Israel is to
rise again from its ashes, it can
only be by abstaining from all at-
tempts at secular aggrandisement.
The new Israel will be in all the
circumstances of its growth super-
natural. Others (Kay, Seinecke,
Oort, Naegelsbach) make ‘the
people’ = Israel, but this limitation
hardly suits the context, which re-
fers to ‘all flesh.’

8 The word... shall stand]
i.e., specially the promise or pro-
phecy concerning Israel, comp. xliv.
26, xlv. 19, lit. 6, Ixiii. 1, Jer. xliv.
28, 29, of which all mankind shall
experience the saving fruits,

° Here the prophet is transported
mentally to Palestine and to the
time immediately before the fulfil-
ment of the promise. He calls
upon Jerusalem to announce to her
‘daughter’-cities (cf. Ezek. xvi. 46-
48) the glad tidings of the approach
of their God. By Jerusalem he
means not merely the phenomenal
or actual Jerusalem in its state of
desolation, but the ideal Jerusalem,
which has walls and watchmen (lii.
8, 9, cf. xlix. 16), for it is in the
supersensible world, ‘graven on the
palms of [Jehovah’s] hands’ (xlix.
16). The ideal Jerusalem, in this
prophecy, corresponds to the ideal
Israel, though sometimes (e.g., lii. 1,
2) the two conceptions—the ideal
and the phenomenal—are almost
merged in one. See further xlix.
14-19, Ix. 6, and comp. Rev. xxi.
Io (‘the city, the holy Jerusalem,
descending out of heaven from
God’). The passage of the apo-
cryphal Book of Baruch, quoted in
my note on xlix. 16, may also fitly
be compared in this connection.
(Alt. rend. is less poetical ; see how-
ever Kay’s note.)

10 Wis Arm] This is not merely
figurative (as in xxx. 30), but one of
the many symbolic expressions for
the manifestation of the Deity—
touching monuments of a childlike
faith. Analogous phrases are ‘the
Face of Jehovah’ (note on i. 12),
his ‘ Name’ (note on xxx. 27), his
‘sword’ (xxvil. I, xxxiv. 5), and his
‘Hand?’ (viii. 11, lix. 1). ‘Arm of

CHAP. XL.]

ISAIAH.

247

Lord Jehovah, ‘asa strong one? will he come, his Arm ruling
for him ; behold, his wage is with him, and his recompence

before him.

4 Asa shepherd will he feed his flock; in his

arm will he gather the lambs, and in his bosom carry them,
those which give suck will he lead.
12 Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand,
and regulated the heavens with a span, and comprehended the
4 With strength, Sept., Pesh., Targ., Vulg., Ges.

Jehovah’ more especially embodies
the attribute of Almightiness. In
this symbolic sense it occurs only
in II. Isaiah (xl. 10, li. 5, 9, lil
10, liii, 1, lix. 16, lxili. 5, 12).
Ruling for him] i.e, in his in-
terest, Israel being ‘formed for
Jehovah’ (xliii. 21), or, in the lan-
guage of the Vulgate (Ex. xix. 5),
his pecudium. Comp. lix. 16, Ps.
xcvili. 1 (a psalm deeply influenced
by II. Isaiah). His wage...
his recompence| The reward
which he gives to his faithful ones
(see xlix. 4, lxiii. 7,8), perhaps with
the collateral meaning of retribu-
tion to his enemies (so ‘recom-
pence,’ Ixv. 7).

1 At first sight it appears as if
there were here a sudden transition.
Were it really so, the effect would
be most thrilling. But this verse is
in fact closely connected with the
preceding one; it describes the re-
ward of which we have just been
told——will he feed his flock]
The Israelites were the flock of
Jehovah (Ps. Ixxvii. 20, 1xxx. 1), but
during the Captivity a scattered
and miserable flock. Jeremiah says
that his eye ‘shall run down with
tears, because the flock of Jehovah
is carried away captive’ (Jer. xiii.
17). The change in the fortunes of
the Jews is compared by the pro-
phets to a shepherd’s seeking his
lost sheep, and feeding them again
in green pastures (Jer. xxxi. 10, 1.
19, Ezek. xxxiv. 11-16). The refe-
rence is not so much to the home-
ward journey of the exiles as to the
state of temporal and _ spiritual
happiness in which they would
find themselves on their return. The
same figures occur in a psalm,

where a reference to the return from
exile is excluded by the pre-Exile
date, ‘.. . feed them also, and carry
them for ever’ (Ps. xxviii. 9).
‘Will he leaa] Comp. Gen. xxxiil.
13, ‘If men should overdrive them
(i.e., those which give suck) one day,
all the flock will die.’

The homily which begins here
is addressed to the phenomenal or
actual Israel, many of whose mem-
bers were in danger from a subtle
combination of the forces of un-
belief within and polytheism with-
out. It seemed as if Jehovah had
forgotten his people, and as un-
sophisticated man cannot dispense
with a Divine patron, many Jews
were on the point of (literally) fall-
ing into idolatry. The Book of Job
here, as so often, supplies us with
a parallel. Job indeed was not
tempted to polytheism ; if he had
broken away entirely from Jehovah,
he would have stood alone, like
Dante’s Capaneo and Milton’s
Satan. But his spiritual trials
were similar to those of the Jews ;
his confidence in the justice of
Eloah (as a non-Israelite he does
not use the name Jehovah) was
thoroughly shaken. The true God
condescends to meet Job person-
ally. He addresses him ina speech
entirely made up of questions full
of a ‘divine irony,’ the second of
which reminds us strongly of the
speech of Jehovah in our prophecy.
It runs thus, ‘Who set its (the
earth’s) measures, if thou knowest ?
or who stretched out a line upon it ??
(Job xxxviii. 5.) The answer in Job,
in a parallel passage in Proverbs,
and in II. Isaiah, is the same, ‘Who
but Jehovah?’ (Ges., Kay, Naeg.

248 ISAIAH, [CHAP. XL.

dust of the earth in a tierce, and weighed the mountains in
scales, and the hills in a balance? 'Who ‘hath regulated
the Spirit of Jehovah, and being his counsellor informed him?
‘With whom hath he taken counsel, that he might instruct
him, and teach him as to the path of right, and teach him
knowledge, and inform him of the way of perfect discretion ?
» Behold, nations are accounted as a drop on a bucket, andas

e¢ Hath directed, Targ., Pesh., A. V., Vitr.

Hath known, Sept. (Dr. Weir

thinks this a different reading, comp. v. 21, in the Hebr. and the Greek ; but it may

be siniply a paraphrase.

The Hebr. may also mean ‘hath weighed’ (as Prov. xvi.

2), and hence ‘hath tested,’ or ‘obtained accurate knowledge of ;' so Hitz., Naeg.,

Kriiger),

suppose the answer in our prophecy
to be ‘ No maz,’ which seems to be
confirmed by vv. 13, 14; see, how-
ever, the next note.) Some, eg.
Naeg., have taken offence at the
implied ascription of a ‘hollow of
the hand,’ a ‘span,’ and a ‘tierce’
to Jehovah; but prophecy regards
earthly things as types and shadows
of the heavenly. Jehovah has an
Arm in this very chapter (v. 10),
‘hands’ in xlix. 16, a ‘seah,’ ora
‘double seah’ in xxvii. 8, here and
in Ps, lxxx. 5 a ‘tierce.’—A tierce
is (as the Hebr. word shalish im-
plies) the third part of some larger
measure (probably of an ephah) :—
it was a very small measure for
creation, observes Del. (see Ps. doc.
cit.), but a large one for tears.
Obs., the conception of the order-
liness of creation took almost as
firm a hold of the Hebr. mind as
the Greek. Hence the Greek
writer of Wisdom need not be
credited with Alexandrinism when
he writes (xi. 20), ‘ Thou hast or-
dered all things by measure and
number and weight.’ The same
idea of the minuteness of God’s
creative arrangements is expressed
by our prophet metaphorically.

13 Another question, equally iro-
nical with the former, The cor-
rectness of the reading ‘regulated’
is slightly doubtful, but the repeti-
tion of the verb from v. 12 may
perhaps have a special significance.
‘The speaker, as I understand the
passage, professes to sympathise
with one of the theological difficul-

ties of the Jews, and treats it for a
moment as an open question. It
is this :—Jehovah, and he alone,
‘regulated’ or fixed the proportions
of heaven and earth, but who hath
regulated the Spirit of Jehovah?
Was this almighty demiurge him-
self absolutely free? May not
even Omnipotence be subject to
conditions? May there not be
an equal or superior power, whose
counsel must be deferred toeven by
Jehovah? The Spirit of Jehovah
is the life-giving principle in the
Deity, and is especially mentioned
in connection with creation (Gen. i.
2, Ps. civ. 30, Job xxxili. 4). In
II. Isaiah there is a marked ten-
dency to hypostatise the Spirit ;
here, for instance, consciousness
and intelligence are distinctly pre-
dicated of the Spirit (see further on
Ixiii. 10).

M4 ‘with whom hath he taken
counsel] Contrast the Babylonian
myth of a joint action of Bel and
the gods in the creation of man,
and the Iranian of a co-creatorship
of Ormuzd and the Amshaspands
( Vendidad, xix. 34). But there is no
direct reference to either of these
myths. In fact, neither Babyloni-
ans nor Persians had fixed cos-
mogonies.

15 Behold] To prepare the reader
for a new and pregnant instance of
Jehovah’s might. From nature we
pass to history. Countries] Li-
terally ‘ habitable lands.’ The word
occurs three times in the singular
in the first part of Isaiah, thirteen

CHAP. XL.]

ISAIAH.

249

fine dust on a balance; behold, he lifteth up ‘countries as a

straw.

beasts sufficient for burnt offerings).

6(And Lebanon is not sufficient for burning, nor its

17 All the nations are as

nothing before him; as of nought and (as) Chaos they are

accounted of him.

18To what then can ye liken God? and

what similitude can ye place beside him?

f So Hitz, always (except xi. 11), and generally Ges.—Islands, Ancient Versions,
Lowth (here only, see below), Del., Naeg.—Coasts, Ew.

times in the plural in the second
part (including xxiv. 15), and once
in the first (x1. 11). In usage it
is generally applied to the distant
countries of the West, though in
Ezek. xxvii. 15 it may include
India. Bp. Lowth goes so far as
to render it generally in II. Isaiah,
‘distant countries,’ and distance is
certainly implied in xli. 5, xlix. 1,
Ix. 9, Ixvi. 19. This is at any rate
better than ‘islands’ or ‘sea-coasts,’
seeing that in II. Isaiah it is gene-
rally parallel to ‘nations.’ ‘The
frequency with which this word
occurs is very remarkable as indi-
cating the wide range of thought
which distinguishes this prophecy’
(Weir). The two Psalm-passages
in which it is found (Ixxii. 10, xcvii.
1) imply imitation of II. Isaiah.

16 An inference from v. 16. Je-
hovah being so far greater than
man, how can any sacrificial rites
be worthy of him? Judah no doubt
was poor in wood,! but even Leba-
non, were it in the hands of Jeho-
vah’s worshippers, would not yield
wood enough to do Him honour.

Vu. 19, 20.

17 of nought] The preposition
is partitive. ‘ought is regarded
as a great concrete object, of which
the nations are a part’ (Hitzig).
They belong to the category of
nothingness. Same idiom in xli.
24, xliv. 11, Ps. xii. 10.—cChaos]
Hebr. Zéhi, one of the two words
(toha va-bohvz) used together in
Gen. i. 2, to signify the formless
waste of chaos. It is the strongest
expression in the language for life-
lessness, futility, and desolation,
and occurs eight times in II. Isaiah
(besides xxiv. 10, xxxiv. II), once
only in I. Isaiah (xxix. 21).

18 what similitude . . . ] The
prophet might at first sight be sup-
posed to deprecate idolatry. But
it does not appear that the Jews
addressed in these chapters made
images of Jehovah, and the paral-
lel passages v. 25 and xlvi. 5 seem
to show that the incomparable-
ness, the uniqueness, of Jehovah
is the truth which absorbs the pro-
phet’s mind. ‘Similitude’ (d@’math
must therefore not be taken in the
sense of ‘image’ (as in 2 Kings

The uniqueness of Jehovah illustrated by describing how

the idol-gods, first of the rich, and then of the poor, are manufactured.

The prophet’s tone is sarcastic.

While monotheism was still struggling

for existence, it was impossible to seek a common ground with polytheists,
like St. Paul at the Areopagus, or with cool deliberate hand to mete out
justice to the original intention of idolatries. The preacher of monotheism
to a wavering and uncertain people must be instant ‘in season and out of
season.’ A whole series of ironical descriptions, of which this is the first,
remains to attest the prophet’s earnestness. See xli. 7, xliv. 9-17, xlvi. 6,
and comp. Hab, ii. 18, 19, Jer. x. 1-9, Ps. cxv. 4-7, cxxxv. 15-18, and
especially the apocryphal Epistle of Jeremy (Baruch vi.).—We are not
told whether the manufacturers of idols were themselves Israelites.

1 The smallness of the Judzean territory obliged Nehemiah to appoint special offi-
cers for the collection of wood for the sacrifices (Neh. x, 34).

250 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XL.

1° The image—a craftsman casteth it, and a goldsmith
overlayeth it with gold, and forgeth (for it) chains of silver.
206 He that is impoverished in offerings § chooseth a wood that
decayeth not, secketh unto him a skilful craftsman to set up
an image that tottereth not. Can ye not perceive? can
ye not hear? hath it not been announced unto you from the
beginning ? have ye not understood " from the foundations ® of
the earth? *? He who sitteth above the circle of the earth, (and
its inhabitants are as locusts ;) who stretched out the heavens

& So the text literally. He that is poor (chooseth) for an offering, Drechsler.—He
that is experienced in offerings, Rashi (substantially), Luzzatto (altering the points).

h So Hebr. accents, Kimchi, Calv., Ew., Henderson, Weir.—The foundations,
Sept., Pesh., Vulg., Ges., Hitz., Del., Kay, Naeg.—Targ. has, To fear before him who
created the foundations, &c. See crit. note.

xvi. 10), but in that of ‘comparable
object.’

‘8 The image] This is put first
for emphasis. Surely ye will not
compare such an object as this to
Jehovah ?——Chains] To fasten
the idol to the wall.

20 The transition to v. 20 is so
abrupt that I cannot help conjec-
turing that something has dropped
out of the first part of the descrip-
tion. He that is impoverished
in offerings] Most commentators,
since Kimchi, explain this, ‘He
that is unable by reason of his
poverty to dedicate a costly image
to his god.’ But surely this puts
great violence on the text; some
error must have crept in.—The
word rendered ‘offerings’ is ?ri-
mah ‘a lifting up,’ sometimes ren-
dered in A. V. of the Pentateuch,
‘a heave-offering, but which, in
Ezekiel at any rate (see Ezek. xlv.
1, xlviii. 8, 12, 20, xlv. 13), also in
Ex. xxv. 2 (and parallel passages),
Ezra viii. 25, and here, must mean
simply an offering, ie., as Sept.
understands it, something taken
.away (comp. use of verb in lvii.
14, Ezek. xxi. 31, Dan. viii. 11)
from a larger mass, and set apart for
God.

21 An indignant double question
(as v. 28).——Can ye not hear t]
He means an inner hearing, the
‘hearing heart,’ of which Solomon
speaks (1 Kings ili. 9). From
the beginning . . from the

foundations of the earth] In the
beginning ‘He founded it upon
the seas, and established it upon
the floods’ (Ps. xxiv. 2), and ever
since ‘day unto day keeps pouring
out speech, and night unto night
declaring knowledge’ (Ps. xix. 2).
‘For from the creation of the
world His invisible (attributes) are
perceived, being understood by
means of His works’ (Rom. i. 20).
Alt. rend. (see note") injures
the parallelism, and is rather less
natural, as it requires us to take
‘foundations’ =‘ origin,’ or else me-
taphorically =‘ the will and word of
God.’

22 The participial clauses are to
be taken as admiring exclama-
tions, out of logical connection. No
subject and no verb are necessary.
There can be but One of whom
these predicates are true, and the
thought of Him who maketh and
preserveth all things fills the pro-
phet’s mind.——The circle of the
earth] i.e., overarching the earth,
Job xxii. 14, Prov. viii. 27. As
locusts] ‘ There we saw the giants
. . . and we were in our own eyes
as locusts’ (Num. xiii. 33).——
Stretched out the heavens] A
characteristic phrase of II. Isaiah
(see also xlii. 5, xliv. 24, xlv. 12, li.
13), found in Job (ix. 8), Zechariah
(xii. 1), and one of the later Psalms
(Ps. civ. 2). A presumption, which
however derives its main force from
other corroborating circumstances,

CHAP. XL.] ISAIAH.

251
as fine cloth, and spread them out as a habitable tent. * He
who bringeth men of weight to nothing, who maketh the
judges of the earth as Chaos : * (! yea, they were never planted;
yea, they were never sown ; yea, their stock never took root
in the earth: and moreover: he bloweth upon them and they
dry up, and like stubble a tempest carrieth them away.) *™ To
whom then will ye liken me, that I may be equal to him?

saith the Holy One.
Who hath created these ?

! Scarcely . .. Scarcely...

scarcely . .

6 Lift up your eyes on high, and see.
He who bringeth out their host in

when ; Vitr., Ges,, Hitz., Ew., Del.,

Naeg. (in his note, but not in his translation),

arises that these books, or parts of
books, are not so widely separated
in time as some suppose.——As
fine cloth. . . tent] Natural com-
parisons to the childlike Semitic
nations. A Psalmist uses the latter
(Ps. xix. 4); comp. Afzmmelszelt.
For the Babylonian view, see Le-
normant, La Magie, p. 142. Obs.,
dog =‘ fine cloth’; dag =‘fine dust’
(v. 15). j :

23,24 A picture of the revolutions
at all times common in the East,
with a side-reference to the fall of
Babylon. Parallel passage, Job xii.
17-21.

74 Yea, they were never
planted] To a common eye Nine-
veh and Babylon seemed planted
for eternity, firmly rooted in the
soil, but to the prophets, regarding
them from the point of view of the
future, they seemed as though they
had never been. ‘If He destroy
him from his place,’ says Bildad,
‘it will deny him, (saying,) I have
never seen thee’ (Job viii. 18). So
Ibn Ezra, Luzzatto, Kay. The dif-
ficulty, on this theory of the mean-
ing, is in connecting the first half
of the verse with the second. The
truth perhaps is that there zs no
logical connection. The prophet
first exclaims, They never can
have been really planted ; then—
another form of expressing the
same thought, They were planted
indeed, but He blew upon them,
and all was over. According to
the first view, their story was a
comedy ; according to the second,

a tragic reality—The common
rend. is rather a paraphrase, and
obliges us to deviate unwarrantably
from the letter of the original.
‘They were not planted’ is a
negative statement; ‘they were
scarcely planted’ involves the po-
sitive affirmation that they were
(though only just) planted.

2° fhe Holy One| The Hebr.
gadosh is like a proper name, being
without the article, and without
the defining words ‘of Israel,
which we always find elsewhere,
except Ivii. 15, Job vi. 10, Hab. iii.
3, Ps. xxii. 3 (4). Comp. the use of
¢ aoshim, without the article, as an
equivalent of Yahveh, Prov. ix. Io,
xxx. 3, Hos. xii. 1.

26 A third time the prophet takes
up the theme of the uniqueness of
Jehovah.— Who hath created]
Here we have the first occurrence
of the verb dara ‘to create’ :—it is
found in II. Isaiah no less than
twenty times (once in I. Isaiah, viz.,
iv. 5, and once in Amos iv. 13),
another proof of the ‘wide range
of thought’ in this prophecy (see
on vw. 15). These] i.e., these
(=yonder) heavens. He who
bringeth out their host] This is
not the answer to the foregoing
question, which in fact, to the
prophet, answers itself. The par-
ticiple is to be explained like those
in vv. 22, 23. ‘ Bringeth out,’ ie.,
into the field ; it is a military term,
comp. 2 Sam. v. 2, xi. 1 (Hitz.),
The ‘host’ are the stars, which are
described as called over, like sol-

252

ISAIAH,

[CHaP. XL,

[their full] number, (he calleth them all by name) through
abounding might and being firm of strength; not one is

missing.

*” Why sayest thou, O Jacob, and speakest, O Israel, My
way is hidden from Jehovah, and my right hath been let slip

by my God?

*® Hast thou not perceived? hast thou not

heard ? An everlasting God is Jehovah, creator of the ends of
the earth ; he fainteth not, neither is he weary ; there is no
searching of his understanding ; *®who giveth to the weary

diers at the roll-call ; comp. Job
xxv. 3, where the ‘bands’ spoken of
are the stars (see v. 5), and also the
imitation in Ps. cxlvii. 4, 5 :—

He counteth the number of the stars,

Calleth them all by (their) names,

Great is our Lord, and abounding in
might,

Of his understanding there is no number
(i.e. calculation).

According to the Bundehesh (chap.
v.), the stars form a host divided
into several parts, and ranged
under leaders (Spiegel, Avesta,
vol. iii. p. xxxi.). —-By name] i.e.,
by their names. Dr. Weir quotes
John x. 3, ‘He calleth his own sheep
by name.’ The prophet speaks
from the point of view of the exiles,
who learned that the constellations
had names in Babylon.

27 Here the prophet turns to
the despondent yet not unbelieving
kernel of the nation. Those who
form it complain that they are
utterly forsaken by ‘their God’ (he
is still ¢ezr God), that their ‘way’
(the irksome condition of exile)
is hidden from his view (comp.
Ixv. 16), and that their ‘right’
(i.e., their lost independence) passes
unnoticed by him. Similar com-
plaints betokening a weakness of
faith in God’s providence occur
in xlix. 14, Job xxvii. 2.

28 The prophet’s reply. Note the
accumulation of Divine titles—‘so
many shields against despair’
(Hengstenberg).—An everlast-
ing God] His covenant therefore
is irreversible, The prophet had
said as much in w. 8, but felt that
it needed to be enforced. Perhaps,
too, he alludes to the meaning of

Jehovah. The idea of the Divine
everlastingness is one of the pri-
mary notes of this prophecy,——
The ends of the earth] i.e., the
whole earth from end to end.
Babylonia, then, the seat of the
exile of the Jews, is not beyond
Jehovah’s empire, as if he were
only ‘the god of the hills’ of
Palestine. He fainteth not]
As some of the Jews seem to have
imagined in their naive, unspiritual
view of God. Sept. renders ‘he
will not hunger,’ and in fact the
word sometimes means faintness
from want of food, e.g., Judg. viii.
15. The Jews may have thought
that their God missed the fat of
their sacrifices (comp. xliii. 24).
The Biblical narratives on the
other hand are full of suggestive
hints that Jehovah has no human
infirmities, but works for His world
both by day and by night. Thus
each creative act occupies the whole
of the twenty-four hours (Gen. 1. 5,
&c.), and Jehovah goes before His
people in the wilderness night and
day (Ex. xiii. 21). Comp. 1 Kings
viil. 29, Ps. cxxi. 4 ——There is no
searching . . . | Consequently he
must have had good reason for de-
laying the redemption of his people.
The all-wisdom of God is a favourite
idea of Job, though the phrase here
used only occurs in Job v. 9, ix.
10, but comp. xxxiv. 24, xxxvi. 26) ;
God’s ‘understanding’ is spoken
of in Job xii. 13, xxvi. 12, What
strange contrasts there are in the
religious views of members of the
same nation ! (see last note.)

°° Comfort for the Jews in their
depressed condition. They have

CHAP. XL1.] ISAIAH. 253

force, and unto the powerless maketh strength to abound:
and should the youths faint and be weary, and should the
young men stumble, *! yet Jehovah’s waiting ones shall
gather fresh force, they shall *put forth* pinions as the
eagles ; they shall run and not be weary, they shall go on

and not faint.
Lift up (their), Ges., Del.

only to ‘wait for Jehovah,’ i.e., to
believe in him, to become younger
and stronger than ever.

50, 31 The form reminds us of Ps.
XXXIV. 10 (II). They shall put
forth ... ] ‘Thou shalt renew

oldest commentator on this pas-
sage,’ himself a psalmist (Ps. ciii.
5). Itis an allusion to the popular
belief of the ancients that the eagle
moults in his old age, and renews
his feathers.

thy youth as the eagle,’ says ‘the

CHAPTER XLI.

Contents.—The Nations summoned to defend their idolatry by argu-
ment (vv. 1-4); the moral effect of the victories of Cyrus upon them
described (vv. 5-7); a contrast between Israel’s apparent weakness and
real strength in Jehovah (vv. 8-20); the claim to foreknowledge of the
idol-gods considered and dismissed.

1Come silently unto me, O countries, and let the peoples
gather fresh force: let them approach, then let them speak ;
together let us draw near to judgment. * Who hath stirred
up from the sun-rising (the man) whom Righteousness * calleth
to follow him?*: (and) giveth up before him peoples, and

® Meeteth at every step, Ges., Ew., Del.

1-4 Jehovah is thespeaker. The
tribunal appealed to is that of rea-
son, comp. v. 3; the question to be
decided, Who has the best claim to
be God, Jehovah or the idol-gods of
the Gentiles.——Countries| See
on xl. 15.——Gather fresh force]
Same expression in xl. 31 of be-
lievers in the true God. Here it
sounds rather strangely. Perhaps
it is meant ironically, the ‘force’
of the idolaters being utter weak-
ness, as, in v. 21, they are bidden
to produce their ‘ bulwarks.’

2 The first argument for the di-
vinity of Jehovah: the vietorious
career of Cyrus.—— Whom Righ-
teousness calleth to follow him]

Cyrus is, to the prophet, the min-
ister of God’s righteousness, and
God’s righteousness means gene-
rally in the Old Testament His
fidelity to covenant engagements, to
His promises, and to His threaten-
ings (see on xlii. 6). This close re-
lation between Cyrus and Jehovah
is one of the fundamental ideas of
II. Isaiah. Again and again we
are told that this Persian king was
called ‘in righteousness’ (xlii. 6,
xlv. 13). It is only a slight varia-
tion to say (as the prophet does
here) that righteousness called Cy-
rus to follow him. So too in lviii,
8 we read that Israel’s righteous-
ness (i.e., the deliverance which is

254

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XLI.

maketh him trample upon kings, maketh like dust their

sword, like driven stubble » their bow ?

3 He pursueth them,

passeth on in safety ; the road with his feet he *doth not®

tread.

4Who hath produced and carried out this?

He

that hath called forth the generations from the beginning ;
I Jehovah am the first, and with the last I am ¢ He.

> So Sept., Ew.—His ; TExtT.
¢ So Ew., Kay.—Was not wont to, Ges., Del.—(Passeth on) by a road which one
entereth not with one’s feet (or, in which no one can follow him), Weir.
4 The same, Ges.

the fruit of God’s righteousness)
shall go before him ; comp. also Ps.
Ixxxv. 13 (14). If any further jus-
tification of the above rendering
be necessary, let it be xlv. 2, where
the mention of Cyrus’s successes
is preceded by the words, ‘I (Je-
hovah) will go before thee.’ [I see
that this is De Dieu’s explanation,
Animadversiones in V. T., Lugd.
Bat. 1648, pp. 532-3. No other
seems to me reconcileable with
usage, at any rate so far as 7raglé
is concerned, which always implies
following ; see, e.g., Gen. xxx. 30,
1 Sam. xxv. 42, Hab. iii. 5, Job
xviii. 11. So too, I see, thinks Dr.
Weir, though he prefers rendering
‘whom he (God) calleth in righ-
teousness to follow him’; so too
Kriiger, p. 41, n. I. Comp. Sept.
Vulg. Like dust their sword

} ie., incapable of even a pas-
sive resistance, comp. Job xli. 26-
29 (A. V.). Alt. read. applies the
figures to the rapidity of Cyrus’s
victories, for which comp. Lenor-
mant, Ancient History, bk. v. ch.
5. It is, however, not a very na-
tural rend. of the traditional read-
ing, and Ew. rightly follows LXX.
Dr. Weir too inclines to this view.
Against the ancient reference (see
Targ.) of this passage to the call of
Abraham and the victory in Gen.
xiv., Ibn Ezra, Vitr., and Dr. Kay
have each well argued.

5 The road with his feet. . . ]
Cyrus (with Righteousness as his
guide, v. 2) penetrates safely through
districts impervious to ordinary
wayfarers—he goes where there is
no road (comp. xlv. 2a). The As-
syrian kings, too, were accustomed

to boast of the trackless paths
which they had traversed (see on
Xxxvil. 24). This explanation will
suit any of the above renderings
The version adopted will also bear
another meaning, viz. that Cyrus
passes along the road so quickly
that his footsteps are as it were in-
visible. So in xlvi. 11 he is called
an eagle or vulture; and so in
Dan. viii. 5 (referred to by Ew.)
the typical he-goat ‘touched not
the ground.’—Both the alt. rends.
require us to take the last imperfect
in a different sense from the pre-
ceding ones, and are therefore less
natural than that in the text.—Dr.
Weir’s alt. rend. is also given by
Hahn. f

‘who hath produced. . .]
Which of the supposed gods can
have raised up this mighty con-
queror? Surely not those gods
whose worshippers he has come to
overthrow ? Who, but he who sum-
moned into being the generations
of the vanished past and of the
vanishing present—he who pre-
ceded them all, and who will be
still the same self-existent One in
the ages to come? ‘The first and
with the last’; repeated with but
slight difference in xlv. 6 (see note),
and xlviii. 12. It is an unfolding of
the sense attached by the prophets
to the name Jehovah ; comp. Mal.
iii. 6.——z am He] ‘He’ is here
used with emphasis almost as a
title of God, as it is indeed in later
Hebrew (in which ‘I’ is also thus
used),and in the Koran. The state-
ment, ‘I am He, predicates of
Jehovah that he alone is lord and
master (cf. adrés in A’rds épr), and

CHAP. XLI.] ISAIAH. 255

5 The countries have seen it, and are afraid; the ends of
the earth shudder ; they draw near and come; ‘every one
helpeth his neighbour, and saith to his fellow, Be strong.
7 And the caster strengtheneth the goldsmith ; he that smooth-
eth with the hammer him that striketh the anvil: he saith of
the soldering, It is good ; and he strengtheneth it with nails
that it may not totter. ® But thou, O Israel, my servant, O
Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham that loved

Vv. 8-13. How different the condition of Israel, i.e., of the faithful
kernel of the nation, the spiritual Israel! The prophet vainly endea-
vours to express the intimacy between it (or rather him) and Jehovah.
Note the accumulation of titles. First of all, Israel is My Servant.
The full meaning of this title will appear later, when the functions of
the Servant have to be explained (see on xlii. 1). Here the emphasis
is laid on what God does for Israel, not on what Israel does for God.
Jehovah speaks in the character of a friend rather than of a master,
a friend superior in power as in dignity, and bound to his humble
associate not only by the tie of compassion, but by memories of
the past. For Israel is not only a ‘servant,’ but The seed of Abraham
that loved me. The addition of this title (‘that loved me’) to the
name of Abraham is far from otiose. It conveys a reminder to the Jews
that they themselves had come very far short of their ideal, but at the
same time inspires a well-grounded hope that Abraham’s ‘love’ will
call forth the Divine mercy towards his seed. The choice of it is cha-
racteristic of a prophetic writer, who throughout his work gives such
a large scope to the affections. Not that it is a weak, nerveless feeling
which is here intended ; it is a love which is also obedience—for it is

alone self-existent, though his na- described in v. 6. Comp. also

ture be incapable of verbal defini-
tion. It occurs again in xliii. Io,
13, xlvi. 4, xlviii. 12, Deut. xxxii. 39,
Ps. cii, 28 (comp. Rev. i. 11, &c.).
The last passage deserves special
attention, as the psalm in which it
occurs is evidently written by one
who deeply loved and studied II.
Isaiah. It runs :—

But thou art He, and thy years will not
come to an end,

In all the passages in which this
expression occurs, Sept. renders
eyo eiyt (except Ps. Zc. where od
8€ 6 a’rds e?), which at once sug-
gests that the ¢y ecii in John
xviii. 5 is intended in the same
sense—a view confirmed by the
supernatural effect of the sounds

‘ The nameless He whose nod is Nature’s
birth.’
(Young's Night Thoughts, Bk. iv.)

5-7 We should here expect the
result of Jehovah’s command in v.
I. But the trial-scene is postponed
to v. 21. What follows arises out
of the news of Cyrus’s expeditions.
The emergency being so great, the
(Western Asiatic) nations ‘employ
their carpenters and goldsmiths to
make a particularly good and strong
set of gods’ (Sir E. Strachey). A
vivid description is given of the life
in the idol-manufactories (comp. xl.
19, 20). The last feature is ‘to see
that this excellent idol be made
fast, or it might perchance fall’
(Dr. Kay)—a fatal omen for its
worshippers.

256 ISAIAIL. [CHAP. XLI.
me; ®°thou whom I have fetched from the ends of the earth,
and from its outlying parts have called, and I said to thee,
Thou art my servant, I have chosen and not rejected thee;
‘0 Fear not, for I am with thee ; stare not (in thy dread), for I
am thy God; I *have fixed my choice upon® thee, I also
help thee, I also uphold thee with my right hand of righteous-
ness. 1}! Behold! ashamed and confounded shall be all those
that were enraged against thee ; they shall become as nought
and shall perish—the men of thy strife. }®Thou shalt seek
them, but shalt not find them—the men of thy contention;
they shall become as nought, and as nothingness—the men
of thy warfare. 'For I, Jehovah thy God, hold fast thy
right hand ; I who say unto thee, Fear not, / do help thee.

‘the fulfilling of the law,’ and gratitude,—‘ because he first loved us.
These qualifications must be remembered; they doubtless lay in
the background of the prophet’s thoughts. Still the most important
idea in this part of the revelation is that Abraham was not merely
passively but actively Jehovah’s friend, not merely his beloved, but
(literally) his lover. Vitringa, who would unite both meanings, and Dr.
Weir, who takes the former by itself (see crit. note), both destroy
the fine proportions of the idea.—The title here given to Abraham
seems to have taken a firm hold of the prophet’s readers. We find it
again in 2 Chron. xx. 7, comp. James ii. 23, and it is still in use among
the Arabs, who call Abraham haldl ullah ‘friend of Allah, or simply
khaltl. ‘Whom I have chosen.] ‘For the gifts and calling of God
are irretractable’ (Rom. xi. 29, Alford). The Divine election of Israelis a
prominent idea in II. Isaiah ; see especially xliii. 10, xliv. 1, xlix. 7.

¢ So Del., Naeg.—Strengthen, Ges,, Ew., Kay.

® The ends of the earth... ]

himself in Palestine in the opening
The expression is vague. Any

chapter (xl. 9), and there he for the

rather remote country might be so
called in rhetorical language. In
Thucydides, the king of the Per-
sians is said to have come to Greece
“from the ends of the earth’ (Thu-
cyd. i. 69), and a Spartan speaks of
Attica as a distant land (Thucyd.
i. 80, referred to by Seinecke).
The prophet may possibly there-
fore intend Egypt—the starting-
point of the national history of
Israel (comp. Hos. xi. 1). But the
mention of Abraham rather suggests
Mesopotamia (see also on xl. 28).
Throughout II. Isaiah the point of
view shifts from Babylon to Pales-
tine. The prophet had planted

present remains.

10 The consequences of Israel’s
election in Abraham. On his part,
freedom from anxiety; on his ene-
mies’ part, complete destruction.
Have fixed my choice upon
thee] In xxxv. 3 the verb means
‘strengthen,’ but in xliv. 14 the
sense of ‘choose’ seems made out,
and this meaning is the more suit-
able one here, as it gives the ex-
hortation to fearlessness a more
positive, historical basis.

11 The men of thy strife] i.e.,
they who strove with thee. The
indignation of the speaker shows
itself in his quadruple reference to

CHAP. XLL] ISAIAH.

257

vv. 14-16. Not only shall Israel not be overcome ; it shall itself, by
God’s help, overcome its foes. A fine touch is lost in the English here.
In the Hebrew of vv. 14, 15a Israel is addressed in the feminine gender,
as a weak and suffering woman. It was not so in the preceding verses,
and in vw. 154 the prophet significantly reverts to the masculine. All
pride must first be humbled, and then the prophecies can take effect.

4 Fear not, thou worm Jacob, ye ‘ petty folk‘ of Israel ; 7
do help thee (it is the oracle of Jehovah), and thy Goel is the
Holy One of Israel. ' Behold! I make thee a threshing-
roller, sharp, new, double-edged: thou shalt thresh moun-
tains and crush them, and shalt make hills as chaff. 1° Thou
shalt winnow them, and the wind shall carry them away, and
the tempest shall scatter them; but ¢ou shalt exult in

Jehovah, and in Israel’s Holy One shalt make thy boast.

£ Few men, Sept., Vitr., Ges., Hitz., Del.

Israel’s enemies, and the position
of the synonymous phrases at the
end of their respective clauses.

144 Thy Goel] i.e., charged with
the duty of recovering thy rights
and avenging thy wrongs. Comp.
xlvii. 3, 4, Jer. l. 33, 34. See Mr.
Fenton’s article, ‘The Goel, 7heo-
logical Review, Oct. 1878.

15 This weakest of the nations
shall become a power against which
nothing can stand. The figure in
which this is expressed belongs,
like Ixiii. 1-6, rather to the pre-
evangelical period (taking our pro-
phecy as on the whole the earliest
Evangelium), and contrasts at first
sight with xlii. 2, 3. But the truth
is, that while both the contrasting
passages relate to the Servant, the
one refers to him as Israel, the
other as the branch which is one
day to spring out of and to trans-

(See crit. note on iii, 25.)

form Israel. In the interval, the
prediction of the violently-obtained
successes of the Israelites might
well be fulfilled. History tells us
that it was so, in a slight degree,
in the Maccabean war (comp. Ps.
cxlix. 7-9) ; and if only in a slight
degree, the causes are too obvious
to need mention. The essence of
the prediction, however, is that
Israel (i.e., the people of the Jews)
in the strength of Jehovah shall
overcome all the obstacles to the
fulfilment of his destiny. A
threshing-roller . - double-
edged] For the application of the
figure to success in war, see Mic.
iv. 13. In the plains of Hamath
the grain is still threshed by re-
volving sledges, to which circular
saws are attached ;! see also an
XXVill. 27.

vu. 17-20. A picture of the past misery of the Jews and their blissful

future (see on xl. 11).

The dreary interval of the Exile seemed to pious

Israelites like ‘dwelling in the tents of Kedar.’ The principle of life, viz.,
God’s presence consciously experienced, was absent, and each felt with
the Psalmist (who speaks not in his own name, but in that of the Jewish
Church), ‘ My soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth for thee, in a dry
and weary land, without water’ (Ps. Ixiii. 1).?

1 Thomson, The Land and the Book, p. 539.

? A golden psalm! ‘That David is not its author seems to be clear from v. x1, not
to mention other reasons depending on exegesis. It is probably contemporary with
Ps, Ixi., which, if we may press the phrase ‘from the end of the earth (I cry unto

VOL, I. Ss

258 ISATAII. [CHAP. XL.

” The afflicted and the poor, seeking water and there is
none, and their tongue is dried up with thirst! I Jehovah
will answer them ; I the God of Israel will not forsake them,
8 T will open rivers on bare hills, and fountains in the midst of
highland plains ; I will make the wilderness a lake of water,
and dry land springs of water. 1° I will give in the wilderness
the cedar, the acacia, and the myrtle, and the oleaster ; I will
set in the desert the pine, the plane, and the sherbin-tree
together: * that they may at once see and acknowledge, and

7 The afflicted and the poor
... ] It is an exclamation: the
prophet presents his general im-
pression of the Exile in a pictorial
form. With all the compensations
of life in a flourishing commercial
empire, sojourn in a heathen land
appeared to pious Israelites like
a wandering in the desert. The
‘afflicted and the poor’ are the
whole nation, all of which, whether
consciously or unconsciously, had
suffered both from its spiritual and
political privations. Comp. the use
of mr@xot in Matt. xi. 5.

18 Hill and dale shall be full of
streams: a figure for the highest
happiness ; comp. xxxv. 7, and the
imitation of our passage in Ps. cvii.
35. Bare hills] Such as were
found in the desert (Jer. iv. 11, xii.
12), but rarely in Palestine (see on
xiii. 2). Highland plains | Such,
for instance, as Ccelesyria, or the
valley (or, highland plain) of dry
bones, Ezek. xxxvii. Coelesyria is
still called the Beka‘a (=ézk‘ah,
the word employed here), Comp.
xl. 4.

Ff The eyes of the Jews shall
be gladdened with a ‘ paradise’ or
park of stately and shady trees.
The list of trees is eclectic ; they
were probably not quite all natives
of Palestine. The myrtle] The
mention of this tree is important
with regard to the question of the

authorship of these chapters ; for,
putting aside this prophecy, the
myrtle is only referred to in books
certainly written after the Captivity
(Neh. viii. 15, Zech. i. 8, 10, 11, comp.
the proper name Hadassah, Esth. ii.
7). According to Gesenius, hadas =
the myrtle, in the Arabic dialect
of Yemen. ‘Was it imported into
Palestine from Arabia, and when?’!
Plane-tree] ‘The renown of
the plane-tree fills the whole of
antiquity. .. What can be more
acceptable in the arid, rocky laby-
rinths of southern sun-lands, or
tune the mind better to devotion
and admiration, than the tree which,
with its glorious, bright foliage on a
green-grey stem, overshadows mur-
muring springs and brooks, &c.
&c.? But the plane is not indige-
nous in the countries of Semitic
races. Its home is the mountainous
region of the farther Asiatic steppes.$
—Sherbin] So in the Arabic ver-
sion of Saadia (Farq. shurvan;
Pesh. shurvin). The tree is a
small kind of cypress resembling
the cedar (oxycedrus), and was
known to the Assyrians as Sur-
man,* which is mentioned with the
zrin (cedar) as a common tree on
Lebanon.

20 The object of all these won-
ders. Delivered out of such fearful
misery, and introduced into such
paradisal bliss, the Jews cannot but

thee)’ in v, 2, must have been written in a distant land, such as Babylonia (comp.

notes on xl. 28, xli. 9).

1 See Dr. Perowne, art, ‘ Zechariah,’ Smith's Bible Dictionary.
2 Hehn, Aulturpflanzen und Hausthiere, p. 248.

3 bid, p. 252.

4 Esar-haddon used wood of a-hi-me, irin/, and sur-man from Sirion and Lebanon
in building his palace (see the text in Budge's sar-haddon, pp. 78-9).

CHAP. XLI.]

ISAIAH.

259

consider and understand, that Jehovah’s hand hath performed
this, and Israel’s Holy One hath created it.

21 Bring forward your cause, saith Jehovah; produce your
bulwarks, saith the King of Jacob. ” Let them produce (them),
and announce unto us what shall happen: the former things,

repose a lasting and exclusive faith
in Jehovah.

21 The prophet returns to the
judgment-scene so _ suggestively
sketched in vv. 1-4, Jehovah is
the speaker; he addresses, not
this time the idolaters, who are toa
frightened ta speak, but the idol-
gods themselves. The scene re-
minds us of Elijah’s challenge to
the priests of Baal (1 Kings xviii.
21, Naeg.). Your bulwarks]
i.e, your arguments. The verbal
stem is used in the Mishna of legal
disputes ; Job, toa, uses a similar
phrase of the special pleading of
his friends. ‘ Your intrenchments
are intrenchments of clay,’ Job xiii.
12; The King of Jacob] In
opposition to the ‘ Kings’ or patron-
gods of the heathen.

#2 The subject on which the idol-
gods are to be heard is their posses-
sion of supernatural knowledge of
the future. S7 set divinatio, dit
sunt (Cicero). Jehovah openly
identifies himself with his war-
shippers—the King withhis people ;
hence, Let them .. . announce
unto us (so xiiii. 9) what shall
happen. This expression, ‘an-
nounce’ (i.e., predict), seems to me
to determine the sense of the next
phrase, which has been much dis-
puted. The former things...
do ye announce, can only mean,
Predict, if ye can, the things which
are to take place before certain
other events (‘the things that are
ta come hereafter,’ v. 23), in other
words, the near as opposed to the
distant future (so Vitr., Stier, Hahn,
Del.). The idol-gods are summoned
to do this accurately and precisely ;
they are to state what they (the
former things) are ; in order that,
when the time comes, those who
are interested in them may observe
whether they have turned out false
or true (take notice of their

issue).—The difficulties of exposi-
tors have been mainly caused by
the different senses in which the
phrase ‘former things’ is used in
this prophecy. In xlili. 9 it means
events which have been predicted
in former times. In xlii, 9 (with
the article), xliii. 18, xlviil. 3, it
means former events, with an ex-
pressed contrast, in the first two
passages, to a new series of events,
just coming into the foreground.
Ewald adopts the first of these
senses. ‘The heathen, together
with their gods, are called upon,’
he says, ‘... to declare that
which they had in former times
prophesied . . . and which is now
being fulfilled.” (So Hengstenberg,
Hitzig, Henderson, Alexander.) But
the article, which is expressed in the
Hebrew, is against this view, and
sO, it seems to me, is the context.
Besides, haw easy was it to answer
sucha call plausibly by reference to
the Babylonian divination !| Calvin
prefers the second sense. ‘Sic
ergo argumentatur : Si que colitis
idola, sunt dii, oportet ipsos scire
et posse omnia. Atqui nihil pos-
sunt, neque in prosperis, neque in
adversis: megue praterita, neque
Jutura tenent: ergo non sunt dii.’
So tao Naeg. ‘The prophet pre-
supposes that the future can be
predicted directly and indirectly ;
as, for instance, it is all one whether
I say, The fruits of this tree will be
apples, or, These roots are those
of an apple-tree.’ On this theory,
Jehovah gives a choice to the idol-
gods, either to declare the roots of
the future in the past, or to give a
direct prediction of thefuture. God
alone can reveal the secrets of the
past. If the idols can do this, they
are Jehovah’s equals, and may be
trusted for their ability to predict
the future. This is very subtle, but
hardly consistent with the context.
s2

260 ISATAH. [CHAP. XLL

what they are, do ye announce, that we may reflect on them
and take notice of their issue ; or else the future things do
ye declare unto us. *? Announce ye the things that are to
come hereafter, that we may take notice that ye are gods;
yea, do good and do evil, that we may at once stare (in
amazement) and behold it. * Behold! ye are of nought, and
your doing is of nothingness: an abomination is he who

chooseth you.

*’T have stirred up one from the north, and he is come ;

23 yea, do good and do evil]
(The Hebrew writer puts the two
alternatives in juxtaposition—‘do
good, and (if ye will) do evil’—
where we should rather disjoin
them.) The Divine speaker waives
the question of foreknowledge, and
makes the least requirement pos-
sible. ‘Prove that you are alive,
by performing some act whether
good (for your friends) or bad (for
your foes).’—Or, we may empty
the terms ‘good’ and ‘evil’ of their
moral meaning, and suppose them
to be used proverbially, ‘to express
the one simple notion of axythzng,
exactly as the two words “right
and left” merely conveyed the idea
of anywhere (Num. xx. 17, xxii. 26,
Deut. ii. 27, Jon. iv. 11).’!_ In favour
of this view, see Gen. xxxi. 24,
Num. xxiv. 13 (in which passages,
however, the form of expression is
not the same? as here), and espe-
cially Lev. v. 4.—Ewald’s explana-
tion, ‘ Prophesy something, good or
bad,’ i.e. (as Dr. Weir, who holds
the same view, puts it) ‘the good
or evil that is to be evolved in
providence,’ does not seem to me
to suit the context, which requires
a more distinct abatement in the
Divine demands.

*4 But judgment goes against the
idol-gods by default. They canshow
no prophecies, cannot so much as
speak; they are ‘dumb not-gods’
(Hab. ii. 18).

35-29 A summary of the evidence

in favour of Jehovah’s claims. It
was he who raised up Cyrus ; none
of the idols predicted Cyrus’s
coming ; it is he too who gives to
Zion the first tidings of the deliver-
ance of her sons. From the
north... ] Alluding to the union
under Cyrus of Media and Persia,
the former of which was_north-
ward, the latter eastward of Baby-
lonia.—One who shall pro-
claim my name] Whichever rend,
we adopt of this passage, it is evi-
dently a prediction of a spiritual
change to be wrought in Cyrus in
consequence of his wonderful ca-
reer. Light is thrown upon it by
a later prophecy, xlv. 3-7, and by
the historical statement in 2 Chron.
xxxvi. 23 (=Ezra i. 2), which the
most sceptical critic will at least
admit as an early interpretation of
the prophecy before us. It hence
appears that the change in-Cyrus,
anticipated with such profound con-
viction, was his conversion to the
belief that Jehovah was the author
of his success, the only true God,
Such a change was a necessary
link in the chain of providential
events working out Jehovah’s pur-
poses; for, until Cyrus was in some
sense a brother of the Jews in faith,
he could not heartily adopt their
national interests. What the pro-
phet foretells is, not a sudden and
violent conversion, but simply that
Cyrus shall become conscious of
his original religious affinity to the

1 Kalish, Commentary on Leviticus, note on Lev. v. 4.

2 Not, that is, any part of Hifil.
are in Hifil.

Del. quotes Zeph. i. 12, Jer. x. 5, where the verbs
But, as Dr Weir remarks, ‘ Even in these passages there is no reason for

departing from the more strict meaning of the words, They can neither bestow bless-

ing:, nor inflict injuries,

261

CHAP. XLL] ISAIAH.

from the rising of the sun one who § shall proclaim® my name,
and he shall * trample upon high officers as upon mortar, and
as the potter that treadeth clay. * Who announced it from
the beginning, that we might know it, and from aforetime,
that we might say, (He is) in the right? Yea, there was none
that announced ; yea, there was none that declared ; yea,
there is none that heard your words. iA forerunner unto

& So Ges., Kay.—Calleth upon, Hitz., Del., Naeg.
h So Targ. (alternative), Clericus, Secker, Lo., Luz, Kr.—TExT. Come.

i See below, and also crit. note.

Jews, and shall act upon that con-
sciousness. We need only assume
in the author a very elementary
knowledge of the religion and
policy of the Persians, such as
(1) that they were monotheists (see
on xlv. 7), and (2) that they went
upon their conquering march (like
the Assyrians in ancient and the
Mohammedans in modern times)
partly as religious missionaries.
It was quite in the spirit of the
evangelical religion of both Testa-
ments to maintain that this mono-
theistic worship was genuine, how-
ever unconscious, worship of the
True God. ‘For,’ in the language
of a later prophet, ‘ from the rising
of the sun even unto the going
down thereof, my name is great
among the nations, and zz every
place incense is offered unto my
name, and a pure oblation; for
my name is great among the
nations, saith Jehovah Sabdoth ;’1
and, in words attributed to St. Peter,
‘In every nation he that feareth
God and worketh righteousness is
accepted ofhim.’? (I have adopted
the rend. ‘ proclaim,’ because it im-
plies a somewhat less complete
recognition of the True God than
the other version—a recognition, in
fact, like that of Nebuchadnezzar
and Darius (according to Dan iv.
34-37, Vi. 25-27), rather than of a
Jewish proselyte, though this, no

1 Mal. i. rr, comp. last clause of v. 14.

doubt, would be only a degree
less wonderful than the actual ad-
mission of a Persian king into the
Jewish Church.

25 igh officers] The rend.
‘viceroys’ (1st ed.) is too definite,
and does not suit all the passages
in which the word occurs (See Ezra
ix. 2, Neh, ii. 16 &c.). The word
Sagan is of great interest, as it can
only have come into Hebrew from
Babylonia. It is the Hebraised
form of a Babylonian title for a
high officer (see crit. note on xxii.
15). Its long history closes in
Dryden’s ‘Absalom and Achito-
phel’ :—

With him the Sagan of Jerusalem,

Of hospitable soul and noble stem.

26- who announced it. , . ] ‘An-
nounced’ = predicted (as constantly
in II. Isaiah). The speakers are
Jehovah and his worshippers; they
place themselves in imagination at
the time of the fulfilment of the
prediction, when this question will
naturally be asked (Naeg.).
From the beginning] i.e., with re-
ference to the period culminating in
the career of Cyrus.

27 @ forerunner unto Zion .. .]
The speaker is evidently Jehovah.
The order of the words is curiously
irregular ; like St. Paul, the writer
is overwhelmed by the grandeur of
his message.* Following Luzzatto,

? Acts x. 35 ; comp. xvii. 23, ‘ What therefore ye ignorantly worship, that declare

I unto you.’

3 Vitringa’s remark is worth quoting : ‘ Languidior et minus concitata oratio vide-

retur, si illud, Ecce, ecce t//a / integrze sententize esset subjectum.

Oratio est hominum

qui longum tempus exspectarunt lucem et ad eam anhelant, ubi primum aurore cre-
pusculum observant : ecce, aiunt, ecce, adest /'

262

ISAIAIT.

[CHAP. XLL

Zion, (saying,) Beholh, behold them, and unto Jerusalem a

bearer of good tidings I give.!

*8 But though I look, there is

no one, and (though I seek) among these, there is no counsellor,
that I may ask them, and they may give an answer. ” Behold!
they are all vanity ; nothingness are their works; wind and

Chaos are their molten images.

I take the word rendered ‘fore-
runner’ (literally, ‘first one’) as
parallel to and synonymous with
‘a bearer of good tidings’ in the
second clause and the words, ‘ Be-
hold, behold them,’ as referring to
the return of the Jewish exiles. Per-
haps the best commentary on the
passage is lii. 7-12, where the same
‘bearer of good tidings’ is intro-
duced in close connection with the
return of Jehovah to Zion at the
head of his people. In plain prose
the prophet would have written
thus, ‘I give unto Zion a forerunner
and a bearer of good tidings, saying
Behold, behold thy sons’ (comp.
Ix. 4). We have thus botha trans-
position and an omission ; and a
precisely parallel passage, as far as
idiom goes, occurs in Ps. xci. 9,
where the first member of the verse
runs thus, ‘ Because thou, Jehovah
is my refuge,’ and the second,
‘Hast made the Most High thy
habitation ;’ so that we have totrans-
pose, in thought, the verb and its
object from the second clause into
the first, and before ‘ Jehovah is my
refuge, to supply ‘saying’! For
the omission of the latter word,
comp. also xiv. 8, 1 Kings i. 17, &c. ;
and for the breaking up of one
clause into two rhythmical lines,
see crit. note on ili. 12.—A few words

as to the other commentators. Ges, .

and Del. render ‘(I) first (said)
unto Zion, Behold, behold them
(i.e., behold the promised blessings),
and gave unto Jerusalem a hearer
(or, bearers) of good tidings.’ De
Dieu, preferably, as it seems to me,

supposes a transposition, and ren-
ders, ‘Primus ego dabo Sioni et
Hierosolymis laté annunciantem,
Ecce, ecce illa;’ so Vitringa and
(substantially) Ewald. Naeg., whose
work appeared after the above was
written, approaches the interpre-
tation here adopted, grammatically
at least. He makes ‘the first’
(rishon), i.e., as he explains it, ‘the
beginner’ (of Israel’s redemption),
the object to the verb in the second
line, but refers it and the parallel
phrase ‘bearer of good tidings,’ to
Cyrus. ‘Behold, behold them !?
becomes the exclamation of the
prophet, foreseeing the happy con-
sequences of Cyrus’s mission. He
rightly objects to Del.’s view, that
Jehovah was not merely the first
but the only source of prophecy,
and that we have no right to ex-
plain ‘first’ as if it meant alone.
But his own proposal is hardly an
improvement as regards the sense.
The context is entirely taken up
with the subject of prophecy, and
how can Cyrus, himself Jehovah’s
‘Anointed One,’ be his own herald
(wbhassér) ?

28 Jehovah once more looks

round to see if any of the idols
profess an ability to prophesy, but
In vain.—Counsellor] i.e., pro-
phet, comp. xiv. 26, Num. xxiv.
14.
20 With a final word of scorn
the idolaters are dismissed ; their
boasted Palladia are but wind and
Chaos’ (see on xl. 17).—— Works]
i.e., idols, as Ivii. 12 (comp. i. 31).
Ezek. vi. 6,

' T am indebted for the reference to a supplementary remark on Hupfeld's note on

Ps, Z.c., by Dr, Riehm, Hupfeld's editor.

CHAP. XLIL] ISAIAH. 263

CHAPTER XLII.

Contents.—The prophet first describes the functions of the Servant of
Jehovah (vv. 1-7); then, after two verses of transition (vv. 8, 9), he be-
comes jubilant at the liberation of the Jews, realized by faith as actual
(vv. 10-17) ; at last, he returns to the present, and details the obstacles

to the Divine manifestation of mercy (vv. 18-25).

' Behold! my servant, whom I uphold, mine elect, in whom
my soul is well pleased; I have put my spirit upon him, he

1 Behold! my servant] ‘ Behold’
invites the attention of the world—
both of the Jews and of the Na-
tions—to a new revelation. The
Servant of Jehovah was first men-
tioned in xli. 8-10, but so cursorily
as only to heighten our curiosity.
All that we learn from that passage
is that the people of Israel is, in
virtue of the call of Abraham, Je-
hovah’s Servant, and (see xli. 16)
that his destiny is to subdue mighty
nations, and to make his boast in
Jehovah. This implies that Israel
has not yet gloried in his God as he
ought to have done,—an inference
which may also be drawn from the
statement (xli. 9) that Jehovah has
not (as might have been expected)
rejected Israel. But our knowledge
is as yet very vague and incom-
plete. In the present magnificently
sketched prophecy, the functions
of the Servant are more fully de-
scribed, though the seer does but
propound fresh riddles to the in-
terpreter. How, in short, can the
description here given of the Ser-
vant be reconciled with the address
to the Servant as Israel in xli. 8 >—
Some critics cut the knot by sup-
posing that the prophetic writer
hesitates between different con-
ceptions of the Servant. Others,
making the less sublime passages
govern the more, take the Servant
to be throughout a collective. But

though it must be admitted that
‘Servant of Jehovah’ in Jeremiah
(xxx. Io, xlvi. 27, 28) and Ezekiel
(xxxvii. 25) is merely a title for the
Chosen People,! this is no reason
why another prophet should not
have given the phrase a deeper
meaning. In the sublimest descrip-
tions of the Servant I am unable to
resist the impression that we have
a presentiment of an individual,
and venture to think that our gene-
ral view of ‘the Servant’ ought to
be ruled by those passages in which
the enthusiasm of the author is at
its height. ‘Servant of Jehovah’
in these passages seems about equi-
valent to ‘Son of Jehovah’ in Ps.
ii. 7 (‘son’ and ‘servant’ being in
fact nearly equivalent in the Old
Testament”), viz. the personal in-
strument of Israel’s regeneration,
or, aS we may say in the broader
sense of the word, the Messiah.
This theory seems to be confirmed
by certain remarkable phenomena
of the Book of Psalms. There, as
in II. Isaiah, there are some pas-
sages which emphasize the royal
aspect of this human and yet (if we
do justice to their language) super-
human Person, and others which
exhibit Him more particularly, as
it is at any rate allowable to read
them, in His prophetic (see Ps.
xxii.), and (see Ps. xc.) in His
priestly aspect. A comparative

1 One of the later psalmists adopts the phrase—‘a heritage unto Israel his servant’

(Ps. exxxvi. 22).
2 Comp

son that serveth him’), Gal. iv. x (‘differeth nothing from a bond-servant’
compares the relation of patron and client.

. 2 Kings xvi. 7 (‘I am thy servant and thy son’), Mal. iii. 17 ‘ his own

. Ewald

264

shall cause the law to go forth to the nations,

ISAIAH,

(CHAP. XLII.

2 He shall not

cry nor clamour, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street ;

study of these two books has led
me to substantially the same view
as Oehler and Delitzsch, and which
has been thus metaphorically de-
scribed by the latter : ‘ The concep-
tion of the Servant of Jehovah is, as
it were, a pyramid, of which the base
is the people of Israel as a whole,
the central part Israel “according
to the Spirit,” and the summit the
person of the mediator of salva-
tion who arises out of Israel.’ To
theological system, indeed, the
prophet was entirely a stranger,
but he had formed a conception of
a future ‘Israelite indeed,’ so in-
creasingly real and vivid as to have
suggested that some features of the
description (chap. liii.) were bor-
rowed from the life of an eminent
prophet.? But we cannot consist-
ently stop short there. If there are
individualising features in chap.
lili, which cannot be explained
from the personification of the
Jewish people, this is hardly less
true of the passage in chap, xlii.,
on which we are now entering.—
There are two phraseological points
of contact between this description
andthe passage in chap. xli. :‘mine
elect (or, chosen),’ comp. ‘I have
chosen thee’ (xli. 8); ‘whom I up-
hold, comp. ‘yea, I uphold thee’
(xli. 10). (See Essay IV., vol. ii.)
Mine elect] A favourite word
in II. Isaiah (occurring six times) ;
found also in Ps. Ixxxix. 3 and
(including plurals) in Ps. cv. 6,
43, Cvi. 5,23. Ps. Ixxxix. a semi-
Messianic psalm, may have been
written before the Exile; Ps. cv.,
cvi. are generally admitted to be
post-Exile works. I have put

my spirit. .. ] In a special sense,
for a high and arduous office (comp.
on|xi. 1).——Cause... to go forth]
i.e. (1) from its Divine source (i. 4) ;
or (2) from Jerusalem (ii. 3) ; or (3)
from its obscurity (Ps. xxxvii. 6).
(1) and (3) may be combined ; (2)
belongs most naturally to the theory
that ‘the Servant’=the people of
Israel. The law] i.e., ‘the law
of God, the religion of Jehovah’
(Ges.) ; ‘the true religion regarded
from its practical side, . . . religion®
as an ordering of life, ydpos’ (Del.).
All religions claim to be ‘laws’;
the distinction of Biblical religion
is that it dwells with increasing
earnestness onthe moralas opposed
to the merely ritual law. Thesame
word (ishpat) is used of mere re-
ligious observances, like 6pno.eia,
in 2 Kings xvii. 26-28 ; contrast its
spiritual use here and in Jer. v. 4,
viii. 7, The corresponding word in
Arabic (diz) means ; 3. obedience,
2. a religion, 3. a statute or ordi-
nance, 4. a system of usages, rites,
and ceremonies (Lane, 5s. v. dé).
In the Kordn (Sur. ii. 126) and
elsewhere din Jbrahim means the
pre-Mohammedan monotheism.
——To the nations] The promi-
nence given to the Servant’s activity
among the heathen is explained by
the context. Israel’s turn comes
later (but see v. 7).

2 He shall not cry] His methods
shall be purely inward and spiritual,
contrasting: I, with the ostentatious
ritual of heathen prophets (1 Kings
xviii. 28); 2, with the imperious
disciplinary manner even of pro-
phets like Elijah (comp. the use of
‘to call’ for ‘to prophesy,’ xl. 2) ;

¥ Delitzsch, /saéah (introduction to xlii. 1-xliii. 13); comp. G. F. Oehler, Old

Testament Theology, ii. 399, 400.
Exposition (1882), p. 19-

Similarly the Rabbinist, Dr. Schiller, in his

2 Yet Sept. boldly translates, if the word may be used here, ‘Jacob, my servant,...

Israel, mine elect’ (v. 1).
Isaiah.

Rashi interprets vv. 1-5 of Israel, vv. 6, 7 of the prophet
Ibn Ezra goes further, and explains the whole section of ‘the prophet.

Saadya (according to Ibn Ezra) still more boldly interprets it of Cyrus.

3 Thus Del.

as well as the writer falls under the perfectly gratuitous censure

of a favourite English critic (M. Arnold, Te Great Prophecy of Israel's Restoration,

Pp» Xxvil).

CHAP. XLI1] ISAIAH. 265

7a *crushed reed he shall not break, and a dimly burning
wick he shall not quench; * truthfully shall he cause the law
to go forth, 4°He shall not burn dimly, neither shall his
spirit be crushed, till he shall have set the law in the earth,

and for his teaching the countries wait.
5 Thus saith the God, even Jehovah, he that created the

® Lit. cracked.

* Unto steadfastness, Kriiger (unto truth, Sept.).

¢ Lit. he shall not be dim nor be cracked.

3, with the destructive agency (not
without a Divine sanction) of con-
querors like Cyrus. It is implied
that he might, if he would, enforce
obedience ; but that, in his Divine
humility (‘axdvah, Ps. xviii. 36),
he waives his right, and limits
himself to persuasion.—Dr. Weir
wrongly regards v. 2 as an anticipa-
tion of chap. liii. ‘ The verse seems
to express patient submission: ¢a‘ak
necessarily implies distress. The
Servant makes no public demon-
strations of anguish: in silence he
waits upon God.’ This is against
the context, which implies that
there is no serious impediment to
his mission; moreover, the use
of ¢a‘ak in some of the verbal
forms is wider than Dr. Weir ad-
mits.!

3 His gentle regard for the germs
of spiritual life ; lvii. 15 is partly
parallel— @ crushed reed] This
is elsewhere a figure for outward
weakness (xxxvi. 6, comp. lviii. 6
Heb.); here, however, the context
seems to show that spiritual in-
firmity is intended, distresses in the
physical sphere being reserved for
v. 7.—Obs. 1. The prophetic Spirit
intimates a difference in the spiritual
capacities of races. Some (e.g. the
Persians) only need to be ‘in-
structed in the way of God more
perfectly ;’ others, though not be-
yond hope (every creature being
rooted in the Creator), are morally
as powerless as a ‘cracked reed.’
2. It is to the latter class, whether
within or without Israel, that the
Servant of Jehovah is chiefly sent

(comp. Matt. ix. 13). He will care-
fully tend them (‘not break’ is a
litotes) with the pure and whole-
some medicine of God’s ‘law.’
Truthfully ] More literally, ‘accord-
ing to the standard of truth’ (same
idiom as xxxii. 1). There shall be
no abatement, no compromise, in
his exhibition of the objective truth.
A contrast may be implied to ‘the
splendid falsehoods of heathenism’
(Hitz.), For alt. rend., comp. xxxiii.
6, xxxix. 8.

4 He shall not burn dimly, &c.].
So, excellently, Dr. Kay. The phra-
seology suggests that the Divine
envoy is himself a lamp and a reed ;
in fact, both emblems are suitable.
He is a reed, not such as Pascal,
in his definition of man, but such
as Dante describes, humble but
not to be broken, and able to
cleanse all stains (Purgatorio, i.94-
136); and he is also a light of the
nations (v. 6). Till he shall
have set .. .| He shall have one
absorbing interest—the final esta-
blishment (li. 4) of the true religion.
The same concentration, it cannot
but be remarked, stands in place
of what we call ‘character” to the
Messiah who fulfils this prophecy.
Teaching] See on 1. 10.—
The countries] Synonymous with
‘the nations.’ Wait] i.e., long-
ingly. Frequently used with Jeho-
vah (e.g. Ps. xxxi. 24 A. V. ‘hope’),
or some gift of Jehovah (Ps. cxix.
43, 74, xxxiii, 18 Weir) for the
object.

5-9 A new revelation (followed by
a solemn pledge) defining the mis-

1 This view has been expressed before Dr. Weir by Kleinert (Zheolog. Studien und
Kritiken, 1862 (pp. 709, 71¢), and refuted by V. F. Oehler, Der Auecht Fehova's,

P. 34.

266

ISAIAIT,

[CHAP. XLIL.

heavens, and stretched them forth, that spread forth the earth
with the things that spring out of it, that giveth breath unto
the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk through it:
®J Jehovah have called thee in righteousness, 4 and taken 4

4 That I may take.

sion of the Servant with greater
precision. Notice the solemnity of
the expressions with which it is in-
troduced and closed. The plan of
that mission (such is the under-
lying thought of v. 5) requires an
exhibition of the Divine power and
wisdom on as large a scale as in
creation and preservation. Comp.
Zech, xii. I, which seems to me
a reminiscence of our passage.
The God] i.e., the true God, in op-
position to the idol-gods (v. 8).
The phrase ‘the God, Jehovah,’
only occurs again Ps. Ixxxv. 9.
Have called thee in righteous-
ness] ‘In accordance with my re-
vealed purpose that Israel should
be my people, and that all nations
should acknowledge me for their
God.’ ‘Righteousness,’ from the
prophetic point of view, is measured
with regard to the Divine covenant
with Israel. Yet where the limita-
tion to Israel is so plainly broken
through, the meaning approaches
that which I find thus expressed
in Stier, ‘the righteousness of the
Creator towards his fallen creature,
which prepares salvation, and calls
the mediator of salvation.’ Only
we must not continue in the ‘ka-
leidoscopic’ manner of Stier, ‘and
appoints him to set up and impart
a new righteousness,’ for shortly
after Cyrus is addressed in the very
same terms (xlv. 13). ——'Will keep
thee] Not ‘will form thee,’ for the
Servant has been ‘formed’ or pre-
destinated from eternity (obs. the
perfect in xliv. 21). For a cove-
nant of the people] ‘The people’
might be taken for ‘the human
race,’ as in v. 5; but xlix. 8, where
the whole phrase occurs again,
limits the reference to Israel. ‘A
covenant of the people’ means ‘the
medium or mediator of a covenant
between Jehovah and Israel.’ As

Hebr. points (see crit. note).

the Servant is called ‘a light’ in
person, so he can be called ‘a
covenant’ in person. Analogies
elsewhere are not wanting. Thus
in xlix. 6 the same Divine represen-
tative is called ‘my Salvation’; in
Mic. v. 5 (4) the Messiah of pro-
phecy is designated emphatically
‘Peace’; and in John xi. 25 the
Messiah of history claims the
speaking title, ‘the Resurrection
and the Life. So, too, in Mal. iii.
i, the ‘angel of the covenant’ is
mentioned, i.e., the angel who is to
actualise, as it were, the covenant-
relation of Jehovah to Israel. In
all these cases persons are men-
tioned as embodying or represent-
ing, and not merely symbolising,
certain spiritual gifts or relations ;
and such clear parallels dispense
us from the obligation of discussing
the meaning of disputed passages
such as Gen. xvii. 10, ‘ This is my
covenant,’ or Luke xxii. 20, ‘This
cup is the new covenant.’—To
critics who deny the personal re-
ference of ‘the Servant,’ the phrase
presents no slight difficulty. Ewald
and Hitzig regard the second noun
as qualifying the first, so that ‘a
covenant of a people’ =a covenant-
people; comp. ‘a wonder of a
counsellor’ = a wonderful coun-
sellor, ix. 5, ‘a wild ass of a man’
=a wild man, Gen. xvi. 12. The
idea expressed in this rendering
is unexceptionable (see Ixi. 6, and
comp. Rom. xi. 15), but the view of
the construction is directly opposed
tothe parallelism. Knobel explains
the phrase by Volksbund,i.e., ‘popu-
lar league.’ The believers in Jeho-
vah, he thinks, formed a kind of
association, recognised as such by
the unbelieving or indifferent ma-
jority, and as evidence for this he
boldly offers liii. 2! Unfortunately
the Hebr. @7/th (rendered above

CHAP. XLIL] ISAIAH. 267

hold of thy hand, and will *keep thee, and will appoint thee
for a covenant of the people, for a light of the nations ; 7 to
open blind eyes, to bring out captives from the prison, and
those who sit in darkness from the house of restraint,—§ I,
Jehovah, that is my name, and my glory will I not give to
another, nor my praise unto images. ®The former things—

e Form, Ew.

‘covenant ’) nowhere has the sense
of ‘league,’ not even in Dan. xi.
28, referred to by Knobel, for the
true meaning of the phrase ‘the
holy covenant’ is the divinely or-
dained constitution of the Jewish
people.?

Accepting the above rendering,
the question remains, ‘Which
covenant is referred to? The old
covenant of Sinai, or the new and
spiritual one described by Jeremiah?
(xxxi. 31-34). Surely the latter ;
otherwise why should the Servant
be said to be ‘called’? Obs., too,
that in liv. 10 Jehovah expressly
contrasts his present ‘covenant of
peace,’ not indeed with the Sinaitic
covenant of Moses, but with that of
Noah ; and that in lv. 3 an ‘ever-
lasting covenant’ is spoken of,
which is at once new and old
(see note). For a light... ]
The words recur in xlix. 6, comp.
li. 4.

7 To open blind eyes] i.e., that
thou mayest open, &c.—The heal-
ing of the blind, both in a physical
and in a spiritual sense, is one of
the chief features of the Messianic
age in prophecy; which kind of
blindness is meant, the context
alone can decide. Here, as in xxix.
18 (but not xxxv. 5), it is spiritual
blindness to which the prophecy
refers—this is clear from vv. 18-20.

1 So Ewald, retaining the usual rendering ‘covenant,’

That the promise belongs first to
the Jews is also clear from those
verses, but the Gentiles are of
course included (comp. v. 6).——
The house of restraint] The pro-
saic Knobel understands this lite-
rally, in the face of v. 22! Itis
the prison-house of physical and
spiritual trouble which is meant
(comp. Ps. cvii. 10, Job xxxvi. 8).
The Jews are doubtless foremost
in the prophet’s mind (v. 22, comp.
xlix. 9, xi. 1).

8 That is my name] Alluding
to the meaning of the name Jeho-
vah, which was at any rate felt to
include the unique reality, and
power to confer reality, of the
Divine Being.——my glory . . .]
Were such a God’s predictions to
fail, He would sink to a lower
level than the imaginary deities
who have, at any rate, not deluded
their worshippers. (So perhaps
we may connect the two halves of
the verse.)

® The former things . . . new
things] Here are two cycles of
events, the one complete, the other
on the point of beginning. Both
have been foreknown by Jehovah ;
and the fulfilment of the earlier
predictions is appealed to as a
pledge of that of the later. Kimchi
understands by the former the pro-
phecies of Isaiah against Senna-

But ‘constitution’ is pro-

bably the true rendering, and not merely an interpretaticn of a rendering. As
Hofmann, the celebrated author of the Schriftheweis, was the first to point out (SB.
i. 414-5), ‘ contract’ or ‘covenant’ is only a secondary meaning of the Hebr. Brith, the
original sense being rather ‘appointment ' (from ba7ah ‘to cut,’ hence ‘to appoint,’ like
Ass. dard), comp. 1 Sam. xvii. 8 :—see in favour of this view Mihlau and Volck’s edition
of Gesenius's Handwérterbuch, s. v. Brith, and Cremer's Biblico-theological Lexicon of
New Testament Greek, S. Vv. Sa6jxy. Passages like Hos. vi. 7, viii. 1, 2 Kings xi. 4,
Job xxxi. 1, Jer. xi. 6, xxxiv. 13 (in v, 18, however, é’rzth has the later sense
‘covenant'), Ps. cv. 10, together with the meaning of the Chaldee and Greek equiva-
lents, seem to me decisive ; also the expression ‘the ark of the covenant’ (i.e., of the
Law), comp. 1 Kings viii. 21. Sce also crit. note.

268 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XLIL

behold! they have come, and new things do I announce;
before they shoot forth, I tell you of them.

10 Sing unto Jehovah a new song, and his praise from the
end of the earth; ‘ye that have gone down upon the seaf
and the fulness thereof; the countries, and the inhabitants
thereof. '! Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up
their voice, the villages which Kedar inhabiteth ; let the in-
habitants of Sela shout ; from the top of the mountains let
them cry aloud; let them render glory to Jehovah, and
declare his praise in the countries !

f Let the sea roar, Lowth (emending from Ps. xevi. 11, xcviii. 7).

cherib, but the Babylonian period
seems more likely than the As-
syrian to be referred to. We must
remember that the real or ecstatic-
ally adopted point of view. of our
prophet is at the Babylonian Exile,
when such predictions as xxxix. 6,
7, had long been fulfilled. The
‘new things’ are the same which
cal] forth a burst of song in vv.
10-12—the wonderful deliverance
of the Jews, and the glories which
shall follow ; ‘new,’ not merely as
being later, but as dimming the
splendour of all previous achieve-
ments (xlili. 18, comp. Ixv. 17).
Before they shoot forth... ]
An evidence of Jehovah’s sole
divinity (comp. xlviil. 5). The
phrase ‘shoot forth’ occurs again
in a similar connection in xlili. 19 ;
what does it signify? Not that one
event ‘develops’ out of another,
but that the ‘word’ of Jehovah is a
seed, which, in virtue of its origin,
has a self-realising character (lv.
10, 11). Some ‘words’ are un-
heard, save in the heavenly council
(Job xv. 8, Q. P. B.), as for instance
those spoken before man _ was
formed; others ‘he revealeth to
his servants the prophets’ (Am. iii.
7), and these latter words have
an equally self-fulfilling power (ix.
8

10 Here the prophet’s language
becomes impassioned, lyrical. ‘The
Spirit taketh him up’ into a future
age. He calls upon the whole
world (vitally interested in Isracl’s

welfare) to Sing unto Jehovah a
new song] (Contrast the intro-
ductory form in xxvi. 1.) ‘A new
song’ is familiar to us in the
Psalter, where it occurs six times ;
two of the Psalm-passages (Ps.
xcvi. I, xcviil, 1) evidently involve
reminiscences of our prophecy. It
means generally a song inspired by
gratitude for new mercies, but here
perhaps it has a fuller content, cor-
responding to the deeper sense of
‘new things’ in v. 9 (comp. Rev.
xiv. 3).—For a general parallel, see
xxiv. 14-16, Ye that have gone
down... ] Ye ‘that do business
on the great waters’ (the corre-
sponding phrase in the parallel line,
Ps. cvii. 23). But Bishop Lowth’s
conjecture, well supported in his
note on this passage, is highly
plausible. A verb as well as a
noun seems required for symme-
try’s sake, and the noun we expect
is ‘the sea,’ ie, the west. The
fulness thereof] i.e., the fishes
(comp. on xxxiv. I).

Cities . . . villages] Both
terms are to be distinguished from
the encampments of the nomad
Arabs. ‘Kedar’ is therefore used
more widely than in xxi. 16.
Sela] Consul. Wetzstein (Delitzsch,
Jesaia, 3rd ed., p. 700) takes se/a
collectively (as inxvi. 1). ‘ Inhabi-
tants of rocks’ are, he thinks, op-
posed to the tribes of the open
desert. A similar Arabic pair of
phrases is in use in the Hauran.

'' Let them render... ] ‘Let

CHAP. XLII]

ISAIAII.

269

% Jehovah shall go forth as a mighty one, as a man
of (many) wars he shall stir up (his) jealousy; he shall
cry, yea, he shall roar; against his foes he shall show

himself a mighty one.

14] have been silent from of old; I

have been still, and restrained myself: (now) like a woman

in travail will I groan, I will pant and gasp at once.

5 T will

lay waste mountains and hills, and all their herbage will I
dry up; and I will turn rivers into habitable lands, and lakes
will I dry up: ‘and I will lead the blind by a way which

the distant nations of the west
glorify Jehovah’ (as xxiv. 15).

18 Jehovah shall go forth... |
This verse gives the reason for the
call for a ‘new song,’ not the gentle
ministrations of the Servant, not the
irresistible march of Cyrus, but the
terrible deeds of the Almighty. It
is in effect the Day of Jehovah
which is here described ; the vic-
tories of Cyrus and the fall of Baby-
lon form but one act in that great
drama; there is much in the de-
scription that follows which can
never have been thought to be ex-
hausted by any possible achieve-
ments of Cyrus. The Day of Jeho-
vah has two sides, a dark and a
bright ; the stern work of retribution
being over, Jehovah’s Servant will
step forward, and assume his de-
lightful office of winning hearts.—
Will this office be again suspended
by the necessity for a fresh inter-
position of the Almighty? To
answer this question would be to
systematise where the prophet has
left but vague outlines.—For the
representation of Jehovah as a
warrior see xxviii. 21, xxxi. 4, lix.
16, 17, Zech. ix. 13, 14, xiv. 3. It
is another instance of the fearless
security with which the prophets
use popular phraseology of mythical
origin, trusting to the general spirit
of their revelation to correct any
verbal inaccuracies.——Shall go
forth] Elsewhere a technical phrase
for taking the field (see xxxvii. 9,
36), but probably here with an allu-
sion to Jehovah’s previous seclu-
sion (see next verse). A mighty
one] Or, ‘a hero’ Comp Jeho-
vah’s title God-Mighty-One, x. 21.

Jealousy] See on ix. 7; also
for the combination with ‘heroism’
or active ‘ might,’ Ixiii. 15.

44 But why does the Mighty One
need to ‘stir up’ his slumbering
‘jealousy’? He tells us himself.
——I have been silent from of
old] ‘To be silent,’ when said of
God (as lvii. 11, Ixii. 1, lxiv. 11),
is ‘to leave the prayers, spoken
or unspoken, of the faithful un-
answered ;’ comp. Ps. xxviii. 1,
Hab. i. 13. Jehovah has been thus
silent ‘for an age’ or eon (‘dla72), a
period stretching indefinitely back-
ward. It is the exaggeration of
strong emotion (so lvii. 11, comp.
Iviii. 12, lxi. 4). Still it corresponds
to the fact that ‘we do not find
miracles for striking providences]
sown broadcast over the whole Old
Testament history, but that they
‘have reference to certain great
epochs and crises of the king-
dom of God’ (Trench, Miracles,
Pp. 43)-——Like a woman in
travail... ]| A figure for unre-
strainable impatience, not without
a secondary reference to the new
birth of Israel and of the world.
(Comp. xxvi. 17, 18, Ixvi. 8, 9.\——
At once] i.e., these signs of anguish
shall be unintermittent.

15,16 Judgment and redemption
side by side. Mountains and hills
are symbols of the heathen world
in general (not merely Babylonia).
—tThe blind] Not, I venture
to think, ‘the spiritually blind’
(Del., Naeg.), which hardly suits
the context, but ‘the perplexed and
desponding’ (Calv.); there is an
exact parallel in lix. 9, 10.—The
difficulties of the commentators

270 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XLII.

they knew not; through paths they have not known will I
make them to go; I will turn darkness into light before them,
and rough places into a table-land. These are the things
which I will surely do, and I will not let them slip. 1” They
shall surely be thrust back ; they shall be utterly ashamed,
that trust in graven images, that say to molten images, Ye

are our gods.

arise from not observing that vv.
10-17 are parenthetical (see on v.
18), and were probably introduced
by an = afterthought. —-zr will
surely do] The tenses are prophetic
perfects ; so also the first tense in
Us Ls

17 Be thrust back] The idola-
ters are represented as marching

them back. Comp. for the figure
Ps. xxxv. 3, 4, and for the rend.
Hupfeld on Ps. vi. 11.—Prof. Birks
makes a break at the end of v. 16,
connecting v. 17 with v. 18. But
this spoils the contrast between the
believing blind in v. 16 and the
unbelievers in v. 17 (see the same
contrast in ], 10, 11), and introduces

against the true believers. Sud-

ru a premature reference to idolatry
denly an invisible hand thrusts

into the new paragraph.

vv. 18-20. We are confronted here with an at first sight perplexing
discrepancy, viz., that whereas in vv. 1-7 ‘the Servant’ is introduced as an
indefatigable worker in Jehovah’s cause, and as specially appointed ‘to
open blind eyes, in v. 19 we find ‘ My servant’ and ‘My messenger’
described as spiritually ‘blind’ and ‘deaf? This, however, is only one
of those apparent inconsistencies in which Eastern poets and teachers
delight, and which are intended to set us on the search for a higher and
reconciling idea, The higher idea in the case before us is that the place
of the incompetent messenger shall be taken by one both able and willing
to supply his deficiencies and to correct his faults. Israel the people
being as yet inadequate to his sublime destiny, Jehovah’s own ‘elect’

shall come to transform and elevate the ‘ unprofitable servant.’

8 Hear, ye deaf; and ye blind, look, that ye may see.
19 Who is blind but my servant? and deaf as my messenger

18 Hear, ye deaf... ] Jeho-
vah is the speaker; he has before
him a company of spiritually deaf
and blind (see on xlii, 8). Surely
(we may suppose him to make this
reflection) they are not all stone-
deaf; some may be able by ex-
erting the power yet peoeusly
continued to them to hear God
speaking in history and in prophecy
(comp. v. 23)!— Thus it would
almost seem as if Jehovah himself
had assumed the function of ‘ open-
ing blind eyes’ previously ascribed
to the Servant, But there is no
real discrepancy. The operations

of Jehovah and of his Servant are
all ane; Jehovah must nominally
interpose here in order that the
incompetence of oe eee
may be exposed, and the necessity
for another Servant, springing out
of but far worthier than Israel, be
made clear,

19 -who is blind butmy servant?]
The blind and deaf Servant means
the people of Israel regarded as
a whole, in its present state of
spiritual insensibility,—Jehovah is
sometimes described anthropomor-
phically as ‘saying’ or, more fully,
as ‘saying to his heart, ie, to

CHAP. XLII]

ISAIAH.

271

whom I §send? Who is blind as "the surrendered one" and

ideaf as the servant of Jehovah?

2° Thou hast seen many

things, but thou observest not; he openeth the ears, and

heareth not!

21 It was Jehovah’s pleasure for his righteous-

ness’ sake to make the instruction great and glorious ; * and

& Or, will send.

b He who is received into friendship, Ges., Del., Naeg. ; the sent one, Kr., Gr.

(slight emendation).

1 So Symm., 2 Heb. MSS., Lo., Gr.; TEXT, blind.

himself (Gen. viii. 21). It is such
a ‘saying’ that we have here.
Jehovah sadly reflects, ‘ Who
among earth’s inhabitants is so
blind and deaf as Israel my Ser-
vant?’ Strange fact! The ser-
vant, who needs a sharp eye to
catch the least gesture of his mas-
ter (Ps. cxxiii. 2)—the messenger,
who requires an open ear to re-
ceive his commissions, is blind—
is deaf !—To interpret ‘Who is
blind, &c.,” of Jesus Christ, as if
‘the guilt and shame of the people
[were] here enforced by direct
contrast with the true Israel, the
Prince who has power with God,’
and as if the true no less than the
phenomenal Israel could be called
blind and deaf, with reference to
his slowness to take offence (Prof.
Birks), is to go directly counter to
Biblical usage. In fact, the only
passages quoted in support of this
farfetched view are Ps. xxxviil. 13,
where the szx-conscious psalmist
resigns his defence to God, and
John viii. 6-11, where the Saviour
(if this interpolated narrative may
be followed), under exceptional
circumstances, refuses an answer
to his persecutors. Whom I
send] This alludes, I think, not
to the description in wv. 1-8, but
to the original commission of
Israel, referred to in xli. 8-13.
The present tense is used because
the character of Jehovah’s Servant
is indelible (as we have been told
already, xli. 9). In spite of Israel’s
offences, Jehovah still ‘sends’ and
‘will (continue to) send’ him.
Chap. hii. will throw further light
on this. As the surrendered

one] One might almost say, ‘as
the Moslem,’ for the prophet’s word
(w’shullam) is closely akin to the
Arabic muslim (Moslem), i.e., ‘he
that devoteth or submitteth him-
self (to God). Comp. Emerson:
‘A more surrendered soul, more
informed and led by God.’ Appa-
rently this word became a favourite
among the pious Jews in later
times. It appears as a proper
name in Ezra viii. 16, x. 15, 29, and
the fem. Meshullemeth (before the
Exile), 2 Kings xxi, 19. Comp.
also the frequent expression /edh

shalem, ‘a perfect (= devoted)
heart.’
20 Thou hast seen... ] The

people of Israel is likened toa man
of mature years and experience, by
which he has failed to profit. A
different image from that in liv. 4d.

21 For his righteousness’ sake]
In accordance with his declared
purpose, Jehovah sent a constant
succession of prophetic teachers
‘since the day that their fathers
went forth from the land of Egypt’
(Jer. vii. 25). A stream of self-
consistent and divinely inspired
instruction struck the outward or-
gan of hearing, but, alas ! not the
inner ear (v. 20). And yet this
‘instruction’ was ‘great and glo-
rious, both in its contents and, so
far as the course of history had yet
gone (see wv. 9), in its fulfilment.

——Instruction] Or, teaching.
Hebr. fdrah ; see on i. 10,
2 and yetitis a people .. .]

Clearly these expressions are not
to be strained. It is very impro-
bable that any large portion of the
exiles suffered literal imprisonment

1 See vi. 9, 10, Jer. v. 21, Ezek, xii. 2, Zech. vii. 11.
9

272 ISAIAH. (CHAP. XLII.
yet it is a people robbed and plundered ; snared are all of
them in holes, and hidden in houses of restraint ; they are
become a prey, and there is none to rescue—a spoil, and none
that saith, Restore. ®% Who among you will give ear to this,
will attend, and be obedient for the time to come? * Who
delivered up Jacob for a spoil, and Israel unto robbers? Was
it not Jehovah, he against whom we sinned, and they would
not walk in his ways, and were not obedient unto his instruc-
tion? % So he poured upon him in fury his anger, and the
violence of war, and it set him on fire round about, but he
took no notice, and kindled upon him, but he would not lay

it to heart.

or confiscation of goods. The de-
pressed life of the Exile is what is
meant; see v. 7 (with note), Ps.
Ixxix. I1, cli. 20, Zech. ix. 11.
In holes] Rutgers’ draws an ar-
gument from this passage against
the theory of the late origin of II.
Isaiah, because ‘holes’ or caves
are characteristic of Judea,and not
of Babylonia. This is very plau-
sible. And yet might not the
prophet use figures drawn from
the older Hebrew writings, in
which caves are so frequently re-
ferred to? Comp. /. C. A,, p. 201.

24 Against whom we sinned]

The prophet, identifying himself
with his people (as in lix. 9-13,
but scarcely in ch. liii.), Contrast
the argument of the unhappy Jewish
exiles in Egypt, Jer. xliv. 17-19—
a most instructive passage !

*° Kindled upon him] There is
an evident allusion to this passage
in xliii. 2, where the same phrase
occurs, ‘a striking instance,’ as
Dr. Kay well observes, ‘of the
double aspect in which Israel is
presented in these chapters. The
corrupt nation is subjected to the
fire of judgment ; but the Israel of
God suffers no hurt,

CHAPTER XLIII.

Contents.—‘ All Israel shall be saved.’

Jehovah is the only God ;

prophecy is his evidence ; his word none can make void. An example
of such an irreversible decree is the fall of Babylon and the restoration

of Israel to unimaginable felicity.

’ But now, thus saith Jehovah thy creator, O Jacob, and

he that formed thee, O Israel :

1 But now...] Another of
those bold transitions in which our
prophet delights. It is not, how-
ever, entirely abrupt. ‘But now’

Fear not, for I redeem thee ;

indicates that there has been a
conflict between Divine love and
Divine wrath, and that theformer
has gained the victory. In fact,

1 Dr. Rutgers is, or was, the leading representative of orthodox views of the Old

Testament at Leyden.

My reference is to his able but inconclusive work on the

genuineness of II. Isaiah (De echtheid van het tweede gedeelte van Fesaia, Leiden,

1866), P. 79

CHAP. XLII]

T have called thee by name; mine art thou.

ISAIAH.

273
2 When thou

passest through the waters, I will be with thee,—and through
the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou goest
through the fire, thou shalt not be scorched, and the flame
shal] not kindle upon thee. 3 For I Jehovah am thy God; (I)
Israel’s Holy One, thy deliverer; for thy ransom do I give
Egypt, Ethiopia and Seba in thy stead. ‘Since thou art pre-

the wrath of Jehovah was but
grieved affection. Its force is now
for the time spent (comp. xl. 2);
Jehovah will ow deliver and pro-
tect, reassemble and restore his
people.——Thy creator] Israel
is a new and singular product, in
which special Divine potencies
have been at work: therefore
‘precious’ (v. 4). Among these
potencies is affliction, which to the
unfaithful Israel is only depressing
or even destructive, but to the
faithful is an instrument of purifi-
cation. It is the faithful Israel
(in spite of the point of contact
in v. 24) to which the following
promises belong. ——X redeem
thee] Lit., ‘I have redeemed
thee ;’ i.e., historically, of the past ;
and prophetically, of the future.
QObs., verb and participle occur
above twenty times in II. Isaiah.
Called thee by name] Lit.
‘called with thy name,’ ie., pro-
claimed it. To utter a person’s
name, in primitive times, might be
a grievous injury if the speaker’s
intention were malicious ; it might
also be a high distinction, if the
speaker were much superior in
rank. Comp. Ex. xxxi. 2, xxxiii.
12,17. Israel was specially hon-
oured, for Jehovah combined his
own name with Israel’s, calling it
‘my people” It was a kunya (as
in the case of Cyrus, xlv. 4).——
Mine art thou] Alluding to the
Sinaitic covenant (see Ex. xix.
5, 6). On that wonderful spiritual-
isation of the common primitive
idea of a patron-deity, the German

reader should consult an excel-
lent chapter in Hermann Schultz’s
Alttestamentliche Theologie (first
ed.), i. g4or—41o (‘der Bund’).

2 when thou passeth through
the waters . . .] A glance at the
troubles in store for the Babylonian
empire, but also at any subse-
quent ones in which the Jews
might be involved. The revelation
fuses all these together in one
visionary image. The same use
of the figures of fire and water
occurs in Ps. Ixvi. 12 ; comp. Dan.
iii, 17, 27.——'When thou goest
through the fire] Comp.on xlii. 25.

3 For thy ransom do I give
Egypt] No price is too great for
Israel’s redemption ; other nations
will be sacrificed to attain it..—The
passage implies (1) that the judg-
ments which fall upon unbelievers
are arranged providentially for the
good of Jehovah’s chosen ones—in
this sense, ‘the wicked are a ran-
som for the righteous’ (Prov. xxi.
18, comp. xi. 8); (2) that Jehovah
has a personal regard for Cyrus as
well as for the Jews, and considers
his generosity to the latter (so un-
like the conduct of previous con-
querors) as worthy of a recompence.
History ratified the prophetic word;
what Cyrus had planned (Herod. i.
153), Cambyses carried out. A
more minutely exact correspon-
dence is not to be required. A
literal fulfilment is not the test of a
prophet’s veracity ; and in xlv. 14
another description of the prospects
of these nations is given, which it
is not easy to reconcile with our

1 The promise to Nebuchadnezzar in Ezek. xxix. 18, 19, is only partly parallel. It
represents Egypt, not as the ransom of Tyre (as here of Israel), but as a compensation
to Nebuchadnezzar for his ill-success at Tyre,

VOL. I.

T

274

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XLIIL.

cious in my sight ; art honourable, and I love thee ; therefore

will I give men in thy stead, and peoples for thy life.

5 Fear

not, for I am with thee ; from the sunrising will I bring thy
seed, and from the sunsetting will I gather thee; °I will say
to the north, Give up, and to the south, Restrain thou not;
bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends
of the earth, 7every one who is called by my name, and
whom for my glory I have produced, have formed, yea, have

prepared.

passage. It is clear that the pro-
phet sometimes writes with an eye
on the actual political circum-
stances, and sometimes is wholly
absorbed in the glories of an age
still future—the Messianic.
Seba] i.e., the peninsula of Meroe,
or N. Ethiopia.

* Men]i.e., ordinary men ; comp.
Jer. xxxil. 20, ‘in Israel and among
men’ (Hebr. ’a@davz).

5,8 From east and west, north
and south, the Israelites are to be
gathered to their home. (Parallel
passages, xlix. 12, Ps. cvii. 3).—
Historically interesting, as proving
the wide extent at thus early a date
of the Jewish Diaspora (comp. xi.
11, and note). Not only in Baby-
lonia and Assyria, but in the ‘ far
lands’ of the Mediterranean, and
even perhaps in China (xlix. 12)—
one at least of the ‘endsof the earth’
to the geography of that day, there
were bands of Jewish exiles. But
the peculiarity of the passage does
not so much consist in this, as in
the fact that it contains no express
mention of Babylonia, where in
general the scene of this prophetic
drama is laid. It thus supplies a
striking evidence of the truth that
the scope of a prophecy is not to
be confined to a single age or
country. These latter chapters of
the Book of Isaiah are something
more than a private revelation for
the exiles in Babylon. Great as
are the miseries of the author’s real
or assumed present, he is not so
absorbed by them as to forget the
glories in prospect.—Rutgers ! in-

fers from this passage that chaps.
xl.-xlvi. cannot have been written
during the Exile ; otherwise Babylon
would, he thinks, have been referred
to. The foregoing remarks tend to
show that the passage has no bear-
ing whatever on the question of
date. Rutgers also refers to xi. IT,
as showing that Isaiah had as full
a view of the Jewish dispersion as
is implied in the verses before us.
But this only proves (assuming, as
I am willing to do, the genuineness
of that passage) that Isaiah might
have written these verses, not that
he actually did so. Besides, that
passage contains one word (Assy-
ria), which to some extent dimi-
nishes the value of the comparison.
Bring my sons... ] Here
the earth as a whole must be ad-
dressed. ‘ Bring’ implies the escort
of the Gentiles (xlix. 22).—™my
daughters] Obs. the kind and
even respectful mention of the fe-
male sex in Messianic descriptions ;
see xi. I2 (note), Ix. 4, Joel ii. 28,
Gal. iii. 28.

7 who is called by my name]
i.e., who is Jehovah’s servant. ‘Israel
must live, because the name of
Jehovah has been named on him.’
Dr. Weir, comparing Matt. xxii.
32. —— Produced formed

.. prepared] The three verbs
‘seem to describe the process of
formation from the first rough cut-
ting to the perfecting of the work ;
comp. xlvi, 11’ (Dr. Weir). The
first verb, however, is restricted to
the Divine creative operations,
whether such as implya pre-existent

1 De echtheid van het tweede gedecite van Fesaia, pp. 78, 79.

CHAP. XLIII.]

ISATAH.

275

8 Bring forth* a blind people which hath eyes, and deaf

who have ears.

8 All ye nations, assemble yourselves ; and

let the peoples gather together: who among them can
announce such things? and former things let them declare
unto us; let them produce their witnesses, that they may be

justified, and let them (?) hear, and say, It is truth.

® He bringeth forth, Hitz., Alexander.

letter).

material, or such as do not. The
blessing of Jacob (Gen. xlix.)
shows us how rough was the mate-
rial out of which the church-nation
of Israel was carved.

8 Another of those mysterious
voices, of which we have heard
already (xl. 3-8), bursts on the ear.
Bring forth a blind people . . . ]
The ministers of justice are the
persons addressed. Israel, once
blind and deaf, but now in posses-
sion of sight and hearing, is to be
brought into court (see on xli. 1).
For what purpose will appear later
(v. 10).—Almost all critics explain
‘a blind people that hath eyes,’ as
if it were ‘a people that hath eyes
and seeth not.’ This, however, is
certainly not a natural view of the
construction, nor does it harmonise
well with the context, for how can
a spiritually insensible people be
produced as a witness against the
heathen nations? Calvin and
Ewald seem to be nearer the mark.
The former comments thus: ‘Sic
educam czecos, ut visum ipsis resti-
tuam ; surdos ita liberabo, ut aures
recuperent ;’ the latter, ‘He will
now disengage from their fetters
those who in xlii. 7, 18, were called
blind and deaf, that they may again
receive eyes and ears (as in xlii. 7).’
Both Calvin and Ewald, however
(the one virtually, the other avow-
edly), alter the first word; the
former rendering ‘that I may bring
out ;’ the latter, ‘I will bring out ;’
and both failing to see the close
connection between this and the
next verse. The truth is that this
passage is reversely parallel to
xlii. 20, where of the actual Israel
it is said, that ‘he has seen many

!0'Ye are

I will bring forth, Ew, (changing one

things, but observeth not ;’ and
that ‘he openeth the ears, but
heareth not.” It is to Stier that
the credit belongs of restoring its
natural sense to this otherwise ob-
scure verse.

® All ye nations, assemble
yourselves] On the one side, the
spiritual Israel, a small company
of believers in Jehovah, has already
taken its place; a mighty host of
heathen nations is now summoned
to appear on the other. The ques-
tion is then put tothe latter, Which
of their gods can produce predic-
tions such as those in vv. 1-7? To
prove that they can, the Divine
speaker continues, Let them men-
tion former things, i.e., past events
which they have correctly foretold.
——Unto us] viz., Jehovah and
his servants (as xli. 22),——That
they may be justified] In the
event of their professing to have
foretold events correctly, they must
produce witnesses to justify their
assertions. And let them hear
and say, It is truth] I do not
understand this. The words (or
rather the word) put into the mouth
of the speakers is more suitable to
a judge than either to a defendant
or to witnesses. It would be bold
to alter the text, but the passage
would at once become intelligible,
if we might emend the third person
into the first (on the analogy of xli.
26), and render ‘and that we may
hear, &c.’ The alternative is, with
Luther, Ges., and Naeg., to make
the subject indefinite (‘dass ,..
man hore’); so Dr. Weir, ‘that
men may hear. But this is not a
natural interpretation.

10 But the idol-gods are dumb ;

T2

276

ISATAH,

[cHAP, XLII.

my witnesses, (the oracle of Jehovah,) and my Servant, whom
I have chosen, that ye may acknowledge, and believe me,
and understand that I am He; before me no God was

formed, neither after me shall there be.
and beside me there is no deliverer.

"J, I am Jehovah,
27 have announced >

and declared, for there is no stranger among you; and ye

b Hebr. text inserts, And delivered.
the following verb.

they have no witnesses to produce.
Meantime Jehovah calls upon Azs
witnesses, viz., his people Israel,
which has had abundant proof of
his predictive power— And my
Servant] i.e, ‘and ye are also
my Servant, the chosen instrument
of my purposes ;’ comp. xliv. I.
So Del., Seinecke, Riehm, Naeg.,
taking the phrase as a second pre-
dicate. Others (Vitr., Ges., Hitz.,
Ew., Stier, Kay) explain, ‘and so
(or, and so especially) is my Ser-
vant, taking the two latter words
as a second subject, and distin-
guishing the Servant from the
people of Israel (at any rate, from
the natural Israel). But this is less
obvious. The only antithesis sug-
gested by the context is that be-
tween Israel and the heathen world
(Naeg.). That ye may ac-
knowledge... ]| It is not only
in Jehovah’s interest, but in that of
his people (the spiritual Israel),
that this trial-scene is arranged.
The spectacle of the futility of
heathenism will confirm their faith
in the true God. Iam He] See
on xli. 4. Before me ... ]i.¢.,
as Dr. Alexander well puts it, ‘all
other gods were made, but none of
them was made before I had a
being’ There is also an ironical
allusion to the incongruity of ‘form-
ing’ him who is man’s ‘former’ (xlv.
9).——--Atter me] ie., ‘after I (per
zmrpossibile) have ceased to exist.’

" Then follows a series of royal
self-assertions, resuming what has
been proved above.——i, xX am
Jehovah] See on xlii, 8.—wWo
deliverer] Alluding to v. 3.

2 Prediction the proof of divinity.
7 have announced . | ‘What
none of the heathen prophets

Probably this is merely a miswritten form of
Bunsen proposes to read, And made known.

can do (v. 9), I, Jehovah, have
performed.’—The text-reading pre-
sents great difficulties. Such an
inconsistent series of verbs as ‘an-
nounced—delivered—declared,’can
hardly have come from the pen of
the prophet. Even if it were con-
ceivable, another objection would
remain in force. The subject of
the prophesying referred to in v. 9
(comp. xlii. 9) is the restoration of
the Jews and the Messianic glories.
Neither of these events had as
yet taken place. Consequently the
middle verb of the series must be
practically future, while the first
and third are past, which is most
unlikely. Bunsen’s conjecture is
plausible, but less so, in my opinion,
than that proposed above. [Dr.
Weir follows Stier, explaining
‘declared’ as = ‘proclaimed the
deliverance which prophecy had
announced.’ He supports this by
a reference to xlviii. 20. It should
be remembered, however, that in
nine out of sixteen passages in II.
Isaiah the verb Azshini‘a means
‘to prophesy.’]—--For there is
no stranger... ] ‘Stranger’ here,
as also in Deut. xxxii. 16, is short
for ‘strange, or foreign, god’ (for
the phrase in full, see Ps. xliv. 20,
Ixxxi. 9). No God but Jehovah had
any power for good or for evil over
Israel.—The expression seemingly
admits the claims of other gods
for other nations, but the prophets
sometimes understate their own
belief, through adopting popular
phraseology. According to our
prophet, the idols were ‘of the
nature of nothing’ (xli. 24)——
And Iam Goad] This is the in-
ference from all the foregoing
facts. ‘And’ = consequently (as

CHAP. XLIIL] ISAIAH. 277

are my witnesses (the oracle of Jehovah), and I am God.
13 Also from (this) day forth I am He, and there is none
that rescueth out of my hand; I work, and who can turn it
back ?

44 Thus saith Jehovah your Goel, the Holy One of Israel,
For your sake I “have sent* unto Babylon, and will bring
down “as fugitives, all of them, and * the Chaldeans into the
ships of their shouting,e 1, Jehovah, your Holy One, the

¢ Send (i.e., will send), Driver (Hebrew Tenses, § 113).
4 The bars (i.e., defences, or, possibly, defenders), Theodotion, Vulg., A. E.,

Lowth, Henderson, Luzzatto (one vowel-point different).
e The shouting of the Chaldzeans into sighing, Hitz., Ew., Luzzatto (one point

different).

xl. 18, 25 (Del.). ‘God’; Hebr.
‘el, the Strong One—the common
Semitic name for God.

18 Also from (this) day forth
...] A fresh fact is here men-
tioned. Jehovah, who had for a
time withdrawn Himself, has begun
again to manifest Himself; and if
He, the unique, the unchangeable
one, is at work, the result is certain.
——Who can turn it back 7] i.e.,
who can reverse it? The same
phrase occurs in Job ix. 12, xi. Io,
xxiii. 13, thus forming another of
the numerous affinities between
II. Isaiah and Job. In Isa. xiv. 27,
where it also occurs, it closes a
prophecy ; and here too it seems
to mark a secondary pause in the
discourse.

14 An example of such a work,
which no man can reverse.
For your sake ]|i.e., not for Israel’s
sake as Israel, but as the Servant
of Jehovah. I have sent] viz.,
the destined instruments of my
vengeance. And will bring
down. ..] i.e, ‘and will bring
all of them (viz., the mixed mul-
titude of merchants in Babylon,
see on xiii, 14-22), and espe-
cially (“and” as in ii, 1) the
Chaldzans, down into the ships
of their shouting” The rhythmic
structure of the verse obliges the
prophet-poet to break up this
clause into two. Hence arises some

amount of difficulty in the exegesis.
‘To bring down,’ if used without
qualification, would, in such a con-
nection, most naturally be referred
to the overthrow of proud Babylon ;
comp. x. 13, Xlv. II, 15. But here
the verb does not really stand un-
qualifiedly ; it must be taken to-
gether with ‘in (or into) the ships,’
and then the phrase becomes
analogous to ‘to go down upon the
sea’ (xlii. 10, &c.) for ‘to embark
on a voyage.’ ‘ The ships of their
shouting’ is one of those éguzvogues
in which the prophets delight. It
suggests that the very ships, which
formerly resounded with shouts of
exultation, now only echo with the
cries of despair, and thus forms a
condensed elegy on the strange
mepurereca in the fortunes of the
Chaldeans. [The Hebr. rzznah,
in fact, will bear both meanings,
‘ery of joy’ and ‘cry of grief,
though when used, as here, with a
suffix, the latter meaning is the
first which offers itself! There is
a singularly exact parallel in xvi.
9, 10, where ‘the cry’ (hédad) is
used in a similarly double sense of
the vintage-cheer and the battle-
shout.] Either reference (to re-
joicing or to lamentation) is equally
appropriate in this context. Baby-
lonia was famous for its ships in
the very earliest period of its his-
tory. It was also famous for its

1 Dr. Weir remarks, ‘ 7izzah with suffixes never means ‘‘the cry of joy,” always
‘‘the prayer cry,” being found only in the Psalms, and in Jer. xiv. 12.’
* Mr. Boscawen states that the ships of Ur and other cities on the Persian

278 ISAIAH, [CHaP. XLII.

creator of Israel, your King. 1° Thus saith Jehovah, who
giveth a road through the sea, and a path through mighty
waters, '7who bringeth forth chariot and horse, army and
force—together they lie down, they cannot arise, they are
quenched, they have gone out as a wick :—!® Remember ye
not former things, and things of aforetime consider ye not.
'? Behold, I work out a new thing; already it is shooting
forth ; 'will ye not give heed to it?’ Yea, I will set a road
f So Hitz., Ew., Weir.—Shall ye not experience it, Ges., Del., Naeg.

music, and songs to the music of
the cymbal (xiv. 11) may well have
enlivened the voyages of its tra-
velling merchants. The value of
its ships as means of escape was
seen by Merodach Baladan at one
of the many crises of his history.!
The Assyrian annalist mentions this
in his usual dry way ; the prophet
is a poet as well, and hears the
plaintive note of brave men ‘cry-
ing aloud’ (as xxxiii. 7).—The
flight of the foreign merchants from
the doomed city is referred to twice
elsewhere ; see xiii. 14, xlvii. 15.—
The phraseology of the verse has
struck so many critics as singular,
that I hesitate to express a strong
opinion in favour of the accuracy
of the text. But why may not a
poet express himself in an original
manner? There is nothing con-
trary to usage in the disputed
words, and Hitzig’s and Ewald’s
attempts at correction are certainly
un-Hebraic, not to add (with Del.)
bombastic. —— Fugitives] The
Hebr. word (darikhim) is uncom-
mon, but occurs again in the same
sense in xxvii. I, xv. 5 (probably,
but there is a similar doubt as to
the reading), Job xxvi. 13. The
reading Urikhim ‘bars’ does not
cohere well with the context, and
involves a less natural construction.

vv. 16-21. A fresh prophecy of
redemption, taking in a much
wider field than Babylonia. The

prophecy itself begins at v. 18; it
1s introduced by a vivid represen-
tation of the passage of the Is-
raelites through the Red Sea.
Who giveth a road] Not ‘who
gave,’ but ‘who giveth’ a road, as
in the typical instance of old (so
Del.). Comp. on li. 9, Io.

« J So

18 Remember ye not. .
Jeremiah (xxiii. 7, 8) points to a
time when the great manifestation
of the living God shall no longer be
the deliverance from Egypt, but
the restoration of Israel from ‘the
recesses of the earth. (Comp.
by all means Jer. iii. 16, 17.)
Both to Jeremiah and to our
prophet the chief glories of the
second manifestation are spiritual.
‘T will make a new covenant...
I will put my law in their inward
parts’ (Jer. xxxii. 31, 33). ‘They
shall tell out my praise’ (v. 21).
Former things] Jehovah’s
past interpositions (comp. xlvi. 9).

19 a new thing] An unheard of
thing ; see on xlil. 9, and comp.
Jer. xxxi. 22. Note the singular.
It is shooting forth] A stronger
statement than in xlii. 94. Either
events were more advanced than
when the prophet penned that
verse, or he has become more clear-
sighted, owing to an increase of
faith, The latter alternative is
preferable. Faith, like friendship,*
gives intensified keenness of vision.
Like other faculties, it grows by

Gulf are mentioned in the very earliest Babylonian legends (A¢hene@um, July 20,

1878),

Dr. Weir for the illustration.

71 Schrader, K. A. 7, pp. 350, 331; &. P., xi. pp. 51, 52. I am indebted to

2 Alluding to I.conora’s bold reversal of a popular judgment :—‘ Die Freundschaft

ist gerccht,’ Goethe's Ziuss0, i, 1.

CHAP. XLII1.]

in the wilderness, rivers in the desert.

ISAIAH.

279
20 The beasts of the

field shall honour me, jackals and ostriches, because I gave
waters in the wilderness, rivers in the desert, to give drink to

my people, my elect.

21 The people which I have formed

unto me, they shall tell out my praise.

exercise. Hence in the words,
Will ye not give heed to it? the
prophet calls upon his audience by
a vigorous effort to see as he sees,
and to recognise the roots of the
future in the present. (In support
of the rend. see xl. 21, xlviii. 6, 7,
lviii. 3. The two former passages
seem to me decisive. For alt.
rend. comp. ‘Are they not writ-
ten?’ i.e., ‘Surely they are written.)
A road in the wilderness .. . |
A symbolical description of the
blissful state of the restored exiles.
All their wants are supplied. The
wilderness has become like the
garden of Eden. Life is one stately
procession. (Comp. on xxxv. 8,
xl, 11, xli. 18.)

20 The beasts of the field] Even

the wild beasts shall put off their
ferocity, and by their changed
natures unconsciously do honour to
Jehovah. The prophet’s best com-
mentator is St. Francis. See fur-
ther on xi. 6-9.

21 But it is in Israel that this
moral regeneration attains its
climax. They alone have at once
the physical power and the will
to tell out my praise (comp.
Ps. Ixxix. 13). Thus Jehovah’s
purpose in ‘forming’ them shall
be attained. By ‘telling out’
what God has done for them, and
why He has done it, they shall
overcome the inner opposition of
the unconverted nations. Comp.
the development of this in 1 Pet.

ii. 9.

vv. 22-24. But the opposition between the ideal and the actual Israel
forces itself upon the prophet’s attention, and the tone of revelation, ac-
cording to its wont, adapts itself to this altered mood. Jehovah now
sums up the religious history of the Exile, pourtraying it as it appears
from a distance. It is a black picture. No doubt there were redeeming
points in this history, but not enough to lighten the prevailing hue to
any appreciable extent. Zhese three verses are among the most disputed
in IT, Isaiah. According to some (e.g., Hengst., Stier, Naeg., Kay), they
furnish strong evidence that the author lived before the Babylonian
Exile ; according to others (e.g., Ew., Del.), they prove that his real
or assumed ‘standpoint’ is among the exiles at Babylon. The difficulty
lies in the interpretation of the first part of v. 23, and the first part of v.
24. These two clauses afpear to deny absolutely that sacrifices had been
offered by Israel to Jehovah. Yet how, asks the former class of commen-
tators, could the exiles be charged with this neglect as an offence, sacrifices
being impossible in a foreign land (Hos. iii. 4, Ps. li. 18, 19)? Is it not
the want of faith and love which is complained of, rather than the neglect
of the outward form of sacrifice? May not the phrase, ‘with thy sacri-
fices thou hast not honoured me,’ be compared with ‘ he that slaughtereth
an ox (for sacrifice) is (equal to) a man-slayer’ (Ixvi. 3), where we must
apparently understand the words ‘ina formal, unspiritual manner’? On
this view of the passage the complaint will be equivalent to the indignant
question in i. 11, ‘Of what use is the multitude of your sacrifices to me?
saith Jehovah’? Ido not myself accept this interpretation, because it
seems inconsistent with the latter part of v. 23, in which Jehovah declares

ISAIAH. [CHAP. XLII.

280
that the sacrificial system altogether was no part of his requirements
(comp. Jer. vi. 20, vii. 21-23). The neglect of sacrifices does not appear
to me to be charged against the people as an offence. The point of the
complaint is, that the religious duties of the Jews being so very light,
there was no possible excuse for neglecting them. Prayer was the only
form of worship which Jehovah required. How this can have been said
by a prophet who had before him an authoritative sacrificial code is, no
doubt, a difficult question. Such passages as the present and as Jer. vii.
21, 23 indicate that the Levitical code, in its present form, was probably
not known, and certainly not regarded as authoritative, by either of the
prophetic writers. They may, however, perhaps be explained on the
theory of oratorical exaggeration (see my Jeremzah, on vii. 21-23). But,
at any rate, Ewald and Delitzsch are as mistaken as Hengstenberg in
thinking that our passage is at all decisive as to the real or assumed
‘standpoint’ of the writer. .

» But &thou hast not called upon me,’ O Jacob, ® much
less hast thou wearied thyself about me,® O Israel. 3 Thou
hast not brought me the sheep of thy burnt-offerings, and
with thy sacrifices thou hast not honoured me; I have not
made a slave of thee with offerings, nor wearied thee with

8 Upon me thou hast not called, Del., Kay, Weir.
4 Yea, thou hast been weary of me, Calv., Naeg., Weir.

22 Thou hast not called upon
me] The Jews in exile are here
charged with the neglect of prayer
to Jehovah. That there was a
faithful section of the nation, which
poured out its heart before God,
we know from the group of Exile-
psalms, and perhaps from Isa. xxvi.
16. There is also a later passage
in IT. Isaiah (lviil. 2-4), which im-
plies that, when the hope of de-
liverance dawned upon the Jews,!
many of them put up at least for-
mal petilions to Jehovah. But the
statement of the revelation is doubt-
less true of the majority of the
exiles during the greater part of the
Captivity.—Alt. rend. is explained
by Del. as meaning that ‘Israel
could exert itself to call upon other
gods, but not upon Jehovah ;’ by
Calv. and Vitr., that its prayers
were purely formal, and therefore
not accepted by God (comp. Zech.
vii. 5). Inthe Hebr. ‘me’ is pre-
fixed (‘But not me,’ &c.), but this

is probably for the sake of euphony ;
comp. I. Sam. ii. 3, Q’77, Ps. vii. 14,
Ixili. 9, Cxxxix. 17, Jer. xxxi. 8, in the
Hebrew. I do not think it can be
emphatic, otherwise v. 22 a will not
be parallel tov. 23a. Hast thou
wearied thyself] Notethe paral-
lelism between the second halves
of this and the two next verses.
33 Thou hast not brought me
i This looks like an accusa-
tion, but must be taken as qualified
by the second half of the verse.
——The sheep...] Alluding
to the daily morning and evening
sacrifice.—The three kinds of sa-
crifices—burnt-offerings, peace- or
thank-offerings, and meal-offerings,
and the incense, are grouped as
in Jer. xvii. 26 (Stier). I have
not made a slave of thee with
offerings] Sacrifices fell through
during the Exile (see above). But
it is also possible to explain this
passage on the analogy of Jer. vi.
20, vil. 21-23.

1 T accept for the present the view which has become traditional, that the descrip-
tion in chap. Ivili, relates to an episode in the lite of the Jewish exiles.

281

CHAP. XLII] ISAIAH.

incense. * Thou hast not bought me sweet cane with money,
and with the fat of thy sacrifices thou hast not sated me;
thou hast altogether made a slave of me with thy sins, and
wearied me with thine iniquities. *I, even I, blot out thy
rebellions for my own sake, and thy sins I will not remember.
6 Call to my remembrance, let us plead together: recount

thou, that thou mayest appear righteous.

24 Sweet cane] This was an
ingredient in the holy anointing
oil (Ex. xxx. 23).——"The fat. . .]
i.e. the fat pieces described in Lev.

7 Thy first father

iiicm—Wearied me] The same
expression is used in a similar con-
text in Mal. ii. 17.

vv. 25-28. Here the connection becomes clear again. Jehovah is still

the speaker ; he offers Israel a free pardon.

toadmit his need of it.
his supposed meritorious works.
tion.

Israel, on his side, hesitates

Jehovah replies by calling upon Israel to mention
But Israel has no such works to men-
On the contrary, as Jehovah reminds him, he has been a sinner

from the beginning. This isthe true cause of Israel’s present humiliation.

26 Call to my remembrance]
See last note. Dr. Weir suggests
a new interpretation. ‘ Do not the
words rather mean—Only put me
in mind of thy relation to me, and
of my promises to thee, my Servant,
recount what I have already done
for thee as my Servant, that through
my grace thou mayst be justified
and saved?’ (Comp. the use of the
same verb in lxii. 6, lxiii. 7.) He
thus obtains a closer connection
with the last verse: ‘Thy sins I
will not remember ; only thou put
me in mind of my promise, and
plead with me on that ground.

°7 Thy first father ...] The
general sense is that of Ps. li. 5, if
the speaker there is a representative
of the nation. ‘Father’ may (1)=
founder of the nation, as Gen. x.
21, &c.; and the founder of the
Jewish nation may be either (a),
Abraham (Rashi, Stier, Del.,Naeg.),
comp. li. 2, Ixiii. 16, Matt. iii. 9,
or (b) Jacob (Ew., Seinecke, H.
Schultz, Kay), comp. lviii. 14, and
the common phrase, ‘ children of
Israel.’ Of the two, Jacob is much
the more probable, for Abraham
is too emphatically canonised by

the voice of prophecy (see xli. 8)
to be described here as the first
sinner, whereas certain events in
Jacob’s life were felt by the pro-
phets to be spots on the fair fame
of that patriarch; see Jer. ix. 4, and
comp. John i. 47, ‘in truth a guile-
less son of Israel’ (spoken with a
lofty irony). Or (2) ‘father’ may
be a collective =‘ fathers’; comp.
Gen. xxxi. 29, 42, 53 (?), Ex. ill. 6,
xv. 2, xviii. 4. In this case, the
‘fathers’ of Israel will be either
their ancestors (Ges.), or the lead-
ers of the nation in matters civil
(xxli. 21) and religious! (Judges
xvil. 10, 2 Kings ii. 12). The latter
view is taken by Sept. (‘your first
fathers’), and among moderns by
Hengst. and Henderson (the high
priests collectively from Aaron
onwards), but is opposed by the
occurrence ofa plural in the parallel
line. Ofless likely conjectures, I will
only mention these three. Kimchi,
followed by Hitz, Knob., Merx
(Hiob, p. iv.), Pusey (Daniel, p.
407), thinks of Adam; Vitr. of
Uriah, the High Priest in the reign
of Ahaz (2 Kings xvi. 10-16) ; Luz-
zatto of the sons of Jeshua the

1 Is it more than a mere coincidence that @, which in Hebrew means (doubtless
primarily) ‘father,’ in Egyptian has the ordinary sense of ‘priest’? (See Pierret’s

Vocabulaire hieroglyphique, s. v.)

282

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XLIV.

sinned, and thy mediators rebelled against me; * therefore I
1 profaned consecrated princes, and delivered up‘ Jacob to the

ban, and Israel to reproaches.

! So Sept., Pesh., Vulg.—Will profane...

Targ., Hengst, Stier, Naeg.

High Priest in Ezra’s time, who
offended by taking foreign wives
(Ezra x. 18). The reader will have
gathered that I myself agree with
Ewald (see above 1 4). Thy
mediators] The ‘interpreters’ (so
literally), i.e., ‘mediators’ or ‘am-
bassadors’ (the rendering of A. V.
in 2 Chron. xxxii. 31), are the pro-
phets and the priests, especially
the former. The intercession of a
prophet is sometimes described as
effectual in the greatest perils of
the nation (Ps. cvi. 23, comp. Ex.
XXXil. 10-14, 31, 32)), though before
the Exile, Jeremiah is told that
the prayer of the greatest prophets
could not then avert the punish-
ment of Judah (xv. 1, comp. xi. 14).
Both classes of passages prepare us
for the announcement of a higher
Mediator, in whom Jehovah is so

will deliver up, Hebr. pointed text,

‘well pleased’ that he cannot re-
fuse to accept his intercession (liii.
12). The word rendered ‘mediator’
(mélig) is also used of an angel of
high rank specially friendly to man,
Job xxxiii. 23. —Rebelled against
me] See Jeremiah’s denunciation
of the deceitful prophets (Jer.
xxiii).

28 £ profaned] i.e., ‘treated as
holding no relation to me’ (Jeho-
vah); so xlvii. 6. (The reading
of the pointed text assumes that
the profanation is future ; comp. on
lxiii. 3, 6. So the Targum. See,
however, xlii. 25). Consecrated
princes] i.e., (1) the chief priests,
who are called by this very title
in 1 Chron. xxiv. 5; (2) the kings
Jehoiakim and Zedekiah, who had
received the ‘holy oil’ (Ps. lxxxix.
20).

CHAPTER XLIV.

Vv. 1-5. But let not the true Israel be discouraged. ‘It isa light thing’
that he shall pass uninjured through the judgments which are coming
upon the world (xliii. 2), and even that the grievous dispersion caused by
the various captivities shall have an end. A nobler object of ambition is
to be placed before him—the introduction of the heathen nations within
the circle of higher spiritual influences. Success is assured to him by one
of the grandest Divine promises.

These verses ought to have formed part of the preceding chapter,
with which the two first words connect it. The error in the current
division of the chapters is owing to the analogy of the opening of chap.
xhii. But though there is a similar transition, similarly introduced, at
the head of both chapters, there is a manifest break in the discourse
at the end of xliv. 5, which makes it entirely misleading to continue the
chapter.

1 But now hear, O Jacob my servant; and Israel, whom I
have chosen. 2? Thus saith Jehovah, thy creator, and he that

2 yeshurun] Rather Veshuriin. salem has a second name among
Asynonym for Israel. JustasJeru- her intimates —Ariel (xxix. 1, 2, 7),

CHAP. XLIVv.] ISAIAH. 283

formed thee * from the womb, who will help thee*; Fear not,
my servant Jacob, and thou, Jeshurun, whom I have chosen ;
3 for I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and streams
upon the dry ground ; I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed,
and my blessing upon thy offspring ; ‘and they shall shoot up,
°as grass between the waters, as poplars by water-courses.
* This one shall say, ‘I am Jehovah's, and that one °shall

® (So accents.) Who helpeth thee from the womb, Targ., Vulg., Vitr., Ges.
> So Sept., Lo., Ew.— Hebr. text, Amidst the grass.
* So Symm., Lo., Bi. (poiting differently) ; shall celebrate, or, proclaim, TEXT.

so Israel has an alternative appel-

(Stier). Israel is regarded in the
lation with his Divine friend. In

the earlier name—Israel—the mili-
tant character of Jehovah’s people
was brought prominently forward ;
in the new name it is the moral
attribute of uprightness which is
emphasised, corresponding to the
new office of teacher conferred
upon the spiritual Israel. Thus
there are three names for Jehovah’s
people, Jacob—Israel—Jeshurun,
and each represents a separate
phase of moral progress.— The
meaning of Jeshurun (a derivative
of yashar, ‘upright’) is the Upright
One.! ‘Uprightness,’ indeed, is the
constant burden of the Old Testa-
ment :—the ethical character of its
religion is the source of its vitality.
In Num. xxiii. ro, ‘Israel’ and ‘the
upright’ are even used synony-
mously ; and a collection of tradi-
tions and lyric poems relative to
model Israelites received the appel-
lation, ‘The Book of the Righteous
One’ (Auth. Vers. ‘the Book of
Jasher’).2—ThenameJeshurun only
occurs again in the ‘Song of Moses’
and the ‘Blessing of Moses’ (Deut.
xxxil. 15, XXXiii. 5, 26). ——Whom E
have chosen] The addition illus-
trates the meaning of the word
Jeshurun. It is an ‘imputed right-
eousness (or, uprightness)’ which
is the ground of Israel’s election

flower, and not in the bud.

8 x will pour water] See on xli.
17, 18, and comp. the transition in
Joel ii. 23-28 from the gift of rain
to the outpouring of the Spirit. ——
I will pour my Spirit] What it
is to have the Spirit of Jehovah we
know from xi. 2, 3, and especially
from xlii. 1-4. It is to be full of
the knowledge and fear of God,
and to make the world-wide spread
of the true religion the chief object
of life. After such a promise has
been given in this half-verse, we
are bound not to interpret the next
verse too narrowly, as if it meant
no more than Zech. ix. 17 (Q. P. B.).
——Upon thy seed] And who
are the ‘seed’ of Jacob? Seew. 5
for the answer.

* As grass] Grass is generally
used as an image of what is tran-
sient and soon withers, but now and
then of an abundant growth, as in
Jobv. 25, Ps. Ixxii. 16. The Sept.
reading completes the parallelism,
and restores symmetry to the para-
graph.—As poplars] Not ‘willows,’
see Wetzstein in Del.’s comment-
ary on the passage. The same word
as in xv. 7.——Water-courses |
Artificially conducted streams.

5 The stunted spiritual condition
even of the few believers in Israel
shall be remedied (vv. 3, 4). But

1 Jeshurun is often stated to be a diminutive (e.g., by Ges., Hitz., Ew., Hender-

son), but on very weak grounds,

Are Zebulun and Jedithun diminutives? and would

‘ my pious little one’ (Ewald renders it Frémmchen) be in harmony with the fatherly
seriousness of Jehovah's language? It is simply a personal name, as Justus Olshausen,
Delitzsch, and (in his academical lectures) Dr. Pusey, rightly regard it. _

2 Unless we should, with the Syriac (Josh. x. 13), read sefer hash-shir, ‘the Song-

book.’

284 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XLIV.

be called by * the name of Jacob, and that one shall ¢ mark
on his hand,‘ ‘ Jehovah’s,’ and ¢*be titled by * the name of

Israel.

4 So Sept., Lo., Hitz., Kn.—Write with his hand, Vitr., Ges., Ew., Del.
° So Targ., Lo., Bi. (pointing differently) ; use for a title, Text.

how? This is explained in the
next verse. It is not merely the
‘seed’ of believers in a natural
sense to which the outpouring of
the Spirit is guaranteed (v. 3), but
the whole body of believers in the
coming Messianic age. ‘God is
able of these stones to raise up
children unto Abraham’ (Matt. iil.
9). Comp. on xlv. 25.——This one
shall say ...] (Obs., the first
and the third clauses correspond,
the second and the fourth.) The
prophet is so full of the idea of a
comprehensive Church of Jehovah,
that without any warning he trans-
ports us into the midst of the
thronging Jewish proselytes.!_ The
description reminds us somewhat of
Ps. Ixxxvii. 4, 5 (already compared
by Vitr.), where the representatives
of the heathen nations are described
as being born anew in Zion. Comp.
also Zech. viii. 23 (referred to by
‘many’ in Ibn Ezra’s time).——
Celebrate ...] See on xii. 4.
Mark on his hand] i.e., to
express his devotion to his new-
found God. Such sacred marks
seem to have been once very pre-
valent in Palestine, and the Damas-
cene ladies retain the habit of
tattooing hands, feet, chin, forehead,
and breast.?, Such a prohibition as
Lev. xix. 28 (‘nor print any marks
upon you’) could never have been
carried out absolutely, and probably
referred merely to heathenish tat-

tooing (see the context, and Deut.
xiv. I). Our prophet, however.
though he presupposes the custom
of tattooing, of course does not
mean to be taken literally. Similar
phrases are used elsewhere. For
instance, ‘I bear the marks of Jesus
in my body’ (Gal. vi. 17). ‘ Mark
a cross upon the foreheads of the
men who sigh and groan over all
the abominations which take place
in their midst’ (Ezek. ix. 4,so Rev.
vii. 3, ix. 4, xiii. 16, xiv.1,9). ‘And
it shall be for a sign unto thee upon
thine hand, and for a memorial be
tween thine eyes’ (Ex. xiii. 9, which
is not to be violently harmonized
with Deut. vi. 8). ‘Behold, I have
graven thee upon the palms of my
hands’ (xlix. 16, see note). The rend.
‘write with his hand’ (i.e. subscribe
to a solemn form of dedication to
Jehovah, comp. Neh. ix., x.) is not
without a theological bearing. It
seems intended to exclude any
favourable allusion to a custom of
heathenish origin. That tattooing is
such a custom cannot be doubted;
see Herod. ii. 113, vii. 235, Lucian
de ded syr, 59, and comp. the
sacred marks on the Vishnavite
sects in India, and Waitz’s instruc-
tive remarks on Polynesian tattoo-
ing. But such Puritanism is un-
historical. The Biblical religion is
not that ‘exclusive and unsympa-
thetic faith’ which Positivists repre-
sent itto be. See further crit. note.

1 It has been doubted whether Judaism can be called a proselytising religion.
(See Prof. Max Miiller’s Lectures on Missions.) We should certainly expect it @ priort
to be so ; such fervent monotheism could not help endeavouring to extend its sway.
The words of the above revelation, moreover, certainly regard it as being such, fur
converts imply missionaries. Yet the evidence for the post-Captivity periods is, I
admit, conflicting, and does not allow a generalisation. Wiinsche says there is no
evidence in the Talmud that the Pharisees were greedy of proselytes, but Matt. xxiii.
15, must have some foundation (the school of Hillel seems to have been more favour-
able to aspirants than that of Shammai). The Jews of the Dispersion certainly were
proselytizers. In Damascus, in Arabia, on the shores of the Caspian, in Asia Minor,
in Greece and Rome, the attraction exercised by Judaism is as certain a fact as any in
history.

2 Orelli, Durch's Heilige Land, p. 281.

5 Anthropologie der Nu/urvilker, vi. 36, 37+

-CHAP, XLIV.] ISATAH. 285

vu. 6-28.—Contents.—Jehovah, the God of prophecy, contrasted with
the manufactured gods of the deluded heathen. A fresh appeal to prophecy,
culminating in the prediction of the rebuilding of Jerusalem through the
favour of Cyrus.

° Thus saith Jehovah, the King of Israel, and his Goel
Jehovah Sabdoth; I am the first and I am the last, and
beside me there is no God. 7And who calleth as I, (let him
declare it and expound it unto me,) since I placed ‘the
people of antiquity *? and future things, and things that shall

f The everlasting people, Ew., Naeg.

——Be titled... ] ‘Israel’ or natory. The prophecies of Jehovah

‘Son of Israel’ shall be regarded
henceforth as the most honourable
title which a man can bear.—It is
a peculiar kind of title which is re-
ferred to, analogous to the Roman
cognomen, and still more closely
to the £unxya of men of distinction
among the Arabs, which generally
has a political or religious signifi-
cance (e.g., Salakh-eddin, i.e., ‘salus
religionis’). The verb used in the
Hebrew (4znnah) is radically the
same; from it is derived in later
Hebrew runiy (i.e., a cognomen
or agnomen, though not specially
in an honourable sense). It occurs
again in the same sense in xlv. 4,
and in Job xxxii. 21, 22, in that of
‘to flatter’ (Auth. Vers. ‘ Give
flattering titles’).1

® Here begins one of the prin-
cipal sections of the prophecy. It
is prefaced by a short and simple
but majestic proclamation of Je-
hovah concerning His being. Tam
the first and ITamthe last] ‘[ am
before all things, and shall still
endure though all creation pass
away. So xlviii. 12; comp. the
slightly different form of expres-
sion in xli. 4, and Rev. i. 8, 17,
xxii, 13. ‘The last’ has here the
same sense as in Job xix. 25 (see
Q. P. B.)

* The eternity of Jehovah in-
volves his sole ability to foretell the
future. And who calleth... |
Or, ‘who is wont to call’ (ie,
prophesy, xl. 2). ‘And’ is expla-

(i.e., inspired by Jehovah) reach
back to the ‘placing’ of the
people of antiquity ... It is
doubted whether the latter phrase
means the Jews (Vitr., Ges., Kay,
Weir), or the first inhabitants of
the world (Ibn Ezra, Kimchi, Hitz.,
Del.). Dr.Weirthinksthat ‘thecom-
parison of v. 8 shows that Jehovah
is here appealing to the long-con-
tinued experience of his people in
the past ; and therefore the point
indicated in “since I placed, &c.,”
is the call of Abraham.’ In sup-
port of this view he very aptly
quotes the expression in Ixiii. 11,
‘The days of old (or of antiquity),
of Moses.’ If, however, the Jews
are to be brought in, it seems better
to adopt Ewald’s rendering, ‘the
everlasting people,’ with reference
to the ‘everlasting covenant’ (Ex.
xxxi, 16), the ‘ everlasting priest-
hood’ (Ex. xl. 15), and the ever-
lasting kingdom (2 Sam. vii. 13,
16), promised to the people of
Israel. Such a description of the
Jews is fine and poctical, and not
out of harmony with the contest
(see Stier). It suggests the ever-
lastingness of Gods people, in op-
position to the proximate fall of
the idolatrous nations, as arising
naturally out of its relation to
prophecy and to ‘the everlasting
God’ (xl. 28). But I cannot help
thinking with Del. that, if Israel
had been meant, it would have
been more directly mentioned. Our

1 See, besides the late-Hebrew Lexicon of Buxtorf or Levy, Ewald's Lehrbuch der

hebr. Sprache, § 271, 273.

286 ISAIAI. [CHAP. XLIv.

come, let them announce. * Shudder ye not, neither be ye
terrified ; have I not long since caused thee to hear it, and
announced it? indeed ye are my witnesses; is there a God
besides me? (Nay,) and there is no Rock ; I know of none.
® They who fashion images are all of them chaos, and their
objects of delight cannot profit, and their witnesses are
without sight and without knowledge, in order that they may

be ashamed.

10 Who fashioneth a god, and casteth an image

—to no profit? ' Behold, all its associates shall be ashamed,

and as for the craftsmen—they are of men.

prophet, as we have seen already,
takes a singularly wide view of the
course of history, and the com-
parison of 2 passage in the Book
of Job (so rich in phraseological
and doctrinal parallels), where the
manner of life of the antediluvian
men is called ‘the way of antiquity’
(A. V., ‘the old way’), confirms
the view adopted above. I sup-
pose, then, the Divine speaker to
affirm that the succession of
prophets goes back to the creation
of man—a statement which agrees
with the Book of Genesis, and
seems to be repeated in xlviii. 16
(see note). Placed implies that
the creation of man had a pur-
pose, viz., the same to which all
prophecy points—the conscious
and intelligent glorification of God.
People is here used in the
same sense as in xlii. 5. —~- Things
thatshall come] Not merely things
pretended as future, but such as
shall actually come to pass (Naeg.).

8 Shudder ye not] Viz., at the
convulsions of the Asiatic nations.
——-I know of none] Elsewhere
it is the insult to his glory which
the Divine pleader emphasises ;
here the injury done by idolaters to
themselves. If there were another
Rock of Ages, Jehovah would not
complain; but as his being is
unique, it pains him that men will
not have him for a God (Luther
and Stier). :

® Chaos] See on xxiv. 10.—
Their objects of delight] In a
religious sense, as Ixiv. 11, Lam.
i. 10. Comp. i. 29. Their wit-

Let them all of

nesses] i.e., the witnesses on be-
half of the idols—the heathen, as
opposed to Jehovah’s witnesses—
the Jews (v. 8). That they may
be ashamed] The consequence
of the action is described as if it
had formed part of the intention of
the agent ; comp. vi. 9, xxviii. 13,
Xxx. I.

10 Who fashioneth a God] An
image can doubtless be produced
by art, but who can think of
fashioning an image into a god?
‘Quis nisi demens’ (Grotius).

1) All its associates] A ha-
bhér is a member of a kitcbher, i.e.,
a company, guild, or society (e.g.,
as in the Mishna, of the guild of
the Pharisees) ; comp. Hos. vi. 9,
where the priests of the kingdom of
Israel are called a khdbher. Here
the prophet means the worshippers
of the idol, who together formed a
kind of guild, and by partaking of
the sacrificial meals were brought
into a mystical union with the god
whom they worshipped : comp. Ps.
cvi. 28, ‘They yoked themselves to
Baal-Peor’ ; Hos. iv. 17, ‘Ephraim
is (khabhur) in association with
idols ;? 1 Cor. x. 20, ‘I would not
have you become associates with
demons ;’ Mark i. 23, ‘a man
fastened to (¢v=the Beth societatis)
an unclean spirit.’ With regard to
this mystical union, see further on
i, 2I.—— They are of men] i.e., of
human origin, and how should men
make their maker? Let them
... assemble] Let the members
of the guild combine to defend
their head.

CHAP. XLIV.] ISAIAH. 287

them assemble, come forward, shudder, be ashamed at once.
?2¢The smith sharpeneth an axe,’ and worketh in the coals,
and with hammers he fashioneth it ; he worketh it with his
powerful arm ; he is hungry also, and hath no strength; he
drinketh no water, and is faint. 'The carpenter stretcheth
out a line, he sketcheth it with 4a sharp tool"; he finisheth
it with planes, and marketh it out with compasses ; and
maketh it like the human figure, like the beauty of man, to
dwell in the house. '!He heweth him down: cedars, and
taketh the ilex and the oak, and * fixeth his choice on * trees
of the forest ; he planteth a pine, and the rain maketh it
grow; and it serveth for men to burn, he taketh of them
and warmeth himself; also he kindleth a fire, and baketh
bread ; also he worketh it into a god, and boweth down ; he
maketh it into an image, and worshippeth it. 1° Half thereof
he burneth in the fire; with half thereof he eateth flesh ; he
roasteth roast, and is satisfied; also he warmeth himself,
and saith, Aha! I am warm, I !feel the flame; '7and the
remainder of it he maketh into a god, into his image: he

& So Sept., Del., Weir.—Hebr. text, The smith an axe.

h Red chalk, Kimchi, Vitr.

1 So Ew. (changing a letter),—Hebr. text, To hew down (or, possibly, He pre-
pareth to hew down, Del.).

k Reareth him some, Ew.
1 Lit. see.

1213 A specimen of the ‘ grim
and caustic’ Hebrew humour, de-
scribing the laborious process of
‘making a god, first of all of iron,
and then of wood.

18 Stretcheth out a line] i.e.,
upon the block of wood. Like
the human figure] Foolishly for-
getting that man was made in the
image of the true God.—Zin the
house] i.e., either in a temple or
in a private house.

14 The prophet resumes the his-
tory of the wooden idol. The mode
of production of the metal is a
mystery ; iron comes from ‘a path
which noeagle knoweth’ (Job xxviii.
7). But the idol of wood can be
traced further back. Nature itself
has been visibly at work, or rather
—strange irony of circumstance !—
the true God Himself who ‘sendeth
his rain’ equally upon believers

and misbelievers. The description
‘moves retrogressively’ (Del.) ; the
mention of the trees suggests their
selection, and this again their plant-
ing. Tastes may differ; but all
agree in choosing good solid tim-
ber. — Fixeth his choice] Ren-
dering as xli. 10. A pine] The
Heb. ’dven obviously = Ass. 7727,
the cedar of Lebanon (see on xli.
19). Consequently the former must,
at any rate, be some tree more
akin to the cedar than to the
ash.

16 One half of the wood the man
uses to make a fire for cooking,
and for warming himself. Half
thereof, in the second line, does not
mean the other half of the wood (as
is plain from v. 17 ; see also v. 19).
The words (or rather, in the Hebr.,
word) are only repeated to make
out a second member to the verse.

288 ISAIAH, (CHAP. XLIv.

worshippeth it and boweth down; and he prayeth unto it
and saith, Rescue me, for thou art my god. '* They have no
knowledge and no understanding, for their eyes are daubed
so that they cannot see, and their hearts so that they cannot
consider. 'And he taketh it not to his heart, he hath
neither knowledge nor understanding to say, Half of it I have
burned in the fire, and I have also baked bread over the coals
thereof, I roasted flesh and ate ; and the residue thereof shall
I make an abomination? the produce of a tree shall I wor-
ship? *°He followeth after ashes; a deluded heart hath
turned him aside, and he cannot rescue himself, nor say, Is
there not a lie in my right hand ?

*1 Remember these things, O Jacob; and Israel, for thou
art my servant: I have formed thee, thou art a servant unto
me; O Israel, thou ™ canst not be forgotten of me™ *] have
blotted out as a mist thy rebellions, and as clouds thy sins:

return unto me, for I have released thee.

*3 Ring out, ye

™ Shalt (or, shouldst) not forget me, Sept., Pesh., Targ., Vulg., Rashi, Hitz.

18 Whence does this folly pro-
ceed? From judicial hardness of
heart. Metaphorically, their eyes
are daubed ; comp. on Vi. Io.

20 The idolater is so wrapped up
in his delusion that he never thinks
of examining the grounds of his
hopes. He followeth after
ashes] Comp. ‘Ephraim follow-
eth after wind, and chaseth the
east wind’ (Hos. xii. 1).

21 A fresh section begins here,
introduced by an admonition.
Israel, attached by such special
ties to Jehovah, should remember
these things (i.e. the folly of
idolatry, comp. xlvi. 8).—Ana
Israel] i.e., ‘and remember this,
O Israel.’ Canst not be forgot-
ten. . .| As Jehovah’s people fool-
ishly complains (xl. 27, xlix. 14).
Against alt. rend. see Del.

22-23 Jehovah has already proved
(or is on the point of proving) his
fidelity to his covenant by pardon-
ing and redeeming (or rather re-
leasing) Israel. Pardon and re-
lease are but two sides of one and
the same deliverance. ‘There is
no peace’ (even externally) ‘for
the ungodly,’ and those who would

return to Zion must first return to
Jehovah. But it is Jehovah who
makes the first advances. He calls
for conversion, on the ground that
I have released thee] ‘ The Israel
of God’ cannot perish ; the only
question which remains is one for
man’s free will to settle, viz. the
numbers of those who shall consti-
tute it.

23 Appeal for sympathy to heaven
and earth; comp. xlix. 13.——
Hath done nobly | Lit., ‘hath done.’
Used pregnantly as in lxiv. 3 (4),
Jer. iv. 17, and probably Ps. xxii. 32
(31). Ye depths of the earth]
Heaven above is contrasted with
Shed] beneath (as in vii. 11). To
have introduced the word Shedl
would have marred the antithesis ;
hence the prophet used a synony-
mous phrase, the meaning of which
was familiar to his readers. Fora
similar reason St. Paul says that
Christ descended, not ets adyv, but
eis Ta Kat@tepa tis yas (Eph. iv. 9).
A difficulty has been felt by some
critics in admitting that Sheol could
thus be called upon to rejoice ; sce
Ps. vi. 5, Ixxxviil. 12, Hence Calv.
and Vitr. suppose ‘the depths (or,

CHAP. XLIV.] ISATAII. 289

heavens, for Jehovah hath done nobly ; shout, ye depths of
the earth ; burst out, ye mountains, into a ringing sound ;
thou forest, and every tree therein! for Jehovah hath re-
deemed Jacob, and beautifieth himself with Israel. *4 Thus
saith Jehovah, thy Goel, and he that formed thee from the
womb ; I am Jehovah, the maker of everything, that stretched
forth the heavens alone, that spread forth the earth—™ who
was with me ?’” * that bringeth to nought the signs of the
praters, and maketh the diviners mad, that turneth wise men
backward, and proveth their knowledge to be folly, that

n Or, Who beside me? This is the reading of the letters of the text, and of Sept.,
Vulg. The vowel-points assume the reading, By myself.

lower parts) of the earth’ are the
valleysand plains, as opposed to the
mountains ; and Del. arbitrarily dis-
tinguishes Sheol from ‘ the interior
of the earth, with its caves, its pits,
and its deep abysses.’ But there
is one argument conclusive against
these theories, viz., that wherever
this and similar phrases occur (see
crit. note) there is always an im-
plied reference to Sheol: Vitr. has
in vain attempted to disprove this.
—The difficulty of these critics may
be met in two ways; either, with
Stier and Hahn, by comparing
xxvi. 19, where some, at least, of
the dwellers in Sheol are called
upon to rejoice, or, better (since
this view is not favoured by the
context, and is opposed by xlix. 13,
where the appeal is made to the
heavens, ¢he earth, and the moun-
tains,) by supposing that Shedl is
not here referred to as the abode
of the departed, but as a part of
the materia! world. The passage
1s simply a poetical apostrophe,
like ‘Hear, O heavens ! and give
ear, O earth, though I would not
deny that there may be an allusion
to the regeneration of which heaven
and earth are to be the subjects
(Ixv. 17). Ye mountains] The
mountains are introduced to make
a second antithesis with ‘the depths
of the earth” In Ps. xcvi. 11 their
place is taken by the sea. Comp.
the striking apostrophe to the

mountains (by themselves) in Mic.
vi. 2. Beautifieth himself]
So xlix. 3, Ix. 21, Ixi. 3. Comp.
‘Thou shalt be a crown of beauty,
in the hand of Jehovah, &c.,
Ixii. 3.

24 The prophet gathers up his
strength for a fresh flight. The
God of creation and of prophecy
has already selected His instru-
ment for Israel’s liberation.
Who was with me?] As my
counsellor (xl. 13). This, as the
more peculiar reading, and the
more easily altered, should have
the preference. Comp. Job ix. 8,
‘Who alone spread out the
heavens.’

*° The signs of the praters|
ie., the agencies of the heathen
soothsayers, specially those of Ba-
bylon (xlvii. 13).

26 His servant] The context
shows that ‘servant’ is here a
synonym for prophet ; comp. Mic.
ili. 7,8, where the prophetic writer
is opposed to the deceitful prophets
(comp. v. 25). Isaiah is expressly
called Jehovah’s servant in xx. 3;
the Egyptians, too, according to
Brugsch, called their prophets by
a term meaning ‘servant of God’
(hon nyter).’ Calv. and Ges. think
‘servant’ is here used collectively
for ‘servants,’ i.e., prophets. But
in this case should we not expect
‘messenger’ in the parallel line,
on the analogy of xlii. 19? It is, I

1 Brugsch, Wieroglyphische Grammatik, p. 106.

VOL. I.

U

290 ISATAH, [CHAP. XLIV.

maketh his servant’s word to stand, and accomplisheth the
counsel of his messengers, that saith of Jerusalem, Let her be
inhabited, and of the cities of Judah, Let them be built, and
her desolate places will I raise up; 7’ that saith to the flood,
Be thou wasted, and thy streams will I dry up ; * that saith
of Cyrus, ° My shepherd,° and all my pleasure shall he accom-

° My companion, Kuenen (see crit. note).

think, the prophetic writer who is
meant (Ibn Ezra, Kimchi, Vitr.,
Naeg., Kay); though Hitzig’s re-
ference of the phrase to Jeremiah
(see Jer. xxx.-xxxiil, L, li.) is cer-
tainly ingenious. Counsel] i.e.,
prediction (comp. xli, 28, ‘ counsel-
lor,’ i.e., ‘ prophet’), His mes-
sengers ]i.e., the prophets generally.

*T The flood] i.e., the Euphrates,
Similar predictions in xi. 15, Jer. 1.
38, li. 36 ; comp. Rev. xvi. 12,

*8 That saith of Cyrus] ‘The
mention of Cyrus by name is here
the seal to the truth and consis-
tency of the whole message.’ We
may adopt these words of Prof.
Birks, though not quite in the sense
in which he uses them, The pro-
phet does not say, ‘ Behold, a child
shall be born, Cyrus by name, and
he shall be my shepherd’ (comp.
the prediction of Josiah’s birth, 1
Kings xiii. 2), but, assuming the
existence of a person named Cyrus,
predicts that he, and no scion of
the Davidic house (as the Jews
may well have supposed), was the
chosen instrument of Israel’s de-
liverance. Here, as in the greater
part of chaps. xl.-xlvi., the prophet
incontrovertibly occupies the stand-
ing-ground of a Jewish exile in
Babylon, It is not surprising that
a Roman Catholic critic! (Dr. P.
Schegg) should pronounce the
whole verse to be a later explana-

tory addition, and the words (or
rather word) ‘to Cyrus’ (Phoresh)
in xlv.1 to have the same origin,
or that Dr. Plumptre (following
Hengstenberg) should have tried
to show that the name of Cyrus
may have come to Isaiah by natural
means. The theory of the former
critic seems to me as purely arbi-
trary as any fancy of the older ra-
tionalists ; the attempt of the latter
is perfectly justifiable, and I cannot
but sympathise deeply with it, as it
springs from a well-founded objec-
tion to the mechanical theory of
prophetic revelations. Dr. Plump-
tre’s explanation?” is perfect, if only
his facts are sound. If it can be
shown (1) that Cyrus was an old
titular name of the Persian kings
(like Pharaoh for the kings of
Egypt) ; (2)that itsignifies ‘thesun;
and (3) that there were communica-
tions between Judah and Persia in
Tsaiah’s time, then it is a very pro-
bable supposition that Isaiah would
hear of the name, and connect it
with the Divine revelations. But I
fear the two former positions (not
to criticise the third) cannot any
longer be maintained. The mean-
ing of ‘the sun’ for Cyrus rests
ultimately upon a statement of Plu-
tarch®; it was long ago questioned
by our countryman Gataker, and,
as Lassen and Spiegel have argued,
is philologically untenable.* The

1 Referred to in Strachey's Fewish History and Politics, pp. 358

9.

2 Biblical Studics, (Lond, 1870), p, 195. The supposed analogy of Pharaoh, re-
ferred to by Dr, Plumptre, is untenable, since this title means, not ‘the sun,’ but
“Great House’ (comp, ‘the Court,’ ‘the Sublime Porte’). In Bp. Ellicott’s Bétve,
vol. iv., Dr. Plumptre still advocates hjs old view on very weak grounds.

3 Plutarch mentions it at the beginning of his life of Artaxerxes. Most, after
Gesenius, claim for it the authority of Ctesias, but this can only be done inferentially.

4 Gataker, Adversaria, ed, 1659, col. 659; Lassen, Zeetschr. f. d. Kunde des Mor-
genlandes, vi. 153; Spiegel, Bectrage zur vergleichenden Sprachforschung, i. 33. 1
‘am sorry that Prof. Birks (2md ed. of Commentary, 1878), and even Dr. Kay (1875),
should have given their support to a thoroughly antiquated explanation.

CHAP. XLIV.]

ISAIAH,

291

plish, even in saying of Jerusalem, Let it be built, and of the
temple, Let Pits foundations be laid.
» TEXT, thy.

recently discovered Cyrus-inscrip-
tion shows that the name (which
the Cyrus-cylinder gives as £uras)
Is not even Aryan at all, being of
Elamitish origin. Prof. Sayce
plausibly connects it with kur=
‘mountain’ (in proto-Medic and
Accadian inscriptions), and re-
marks that we have thus a ready
explanation of the old Herodotean
legend of Cyrus’s childhood (Aca-
demy, October 16, 1880, p. 277).
Cyrus] Hebr. 2éresh (the last
vowel pronounced very short ; the
word is a so-called ‘segolate’ in
form.—mMy Shepherd] ‘i.e., no
mere ordinary ruler, but one ap-
pointed by me to shepherd my
people Israel ; comp. Ezek. xxxiv.
Ir, &c., and see above on xl. 11.—
Josephus makes this interesting
statement :—‘Now this became
known to Cyrus by his reading the
book which Esaias left behind him

of his prophecy ; for this man said
that God had spoken thus to him
in secret: My will is that Cyrus,
&c. This was prophesied by Esaias
one hundred and forty years before
the demolition of the temple. When
therefore Cyrus had read this, and
marvelled at the divinity, a kind of
zmpulse (comp. on xlv. 134) and
ambition seized upon him to fulfil
what was so written’ (Jos. Azz.
xii. I, 2). May there not be an ele-
ment of truth in this story? May
not Isa, xliv. 24-xlv. 7 have been
written, partly at least, with an
apologetic purpose, and intended
for Cyrus as well as for Jewish
readers. The apologies for the
Christians addressed to the Roman
emperors missed their mark and
were unread ; it is perfectly con-
ceivable that the apology for the
Jews addressed to Cyrus was more
fortunate.

Note on‘ That saith of Cyrus’ (xliv. 28), and‘ when thou hast
not known me’ (xlv. 4).

Two illustrations of these passages from an Assyrian source seem

worth noticing.!

It has been observed above that the prophetic writer assumes, rather

than predicts, the existence of Cyrus, that he omits to mention by how
many years (if any) his announcement preceded the birth of the Deli-
verer. His interest is in fact wholly absorbed by the momentous enter-
prise which has been confided to Cyrus. The following quotation from
the Annals of Assurbanipal (king of Assyria from 667 to 626 B.C.) supplies
a contrast rather than a parallel to this studious reticence. It relates to
an event of special interest, both on its own account and for its connec-
tion with the fourteenth chapter of Genesis, viz., the raid of the Elamitish
king, Kudur-nankhundi, into Babylonia. Assurbanipal appears to state
that his name, and the high religious duty committed to him, had been
predicted more than a thousand years before. These are his words :—
‘Nana, who 1635 years had been desecrated, had gone, and dwelt | in
Elam, a place not appointed to her; | and in those days, she and the
Sods her fathers | proclaimed my name to the dominion of the earth. |

The return of her divinity she entrusted to me thus: “Assurbanipal

1 History of Assurbanipal, translated by George Smith (Lond. 1871), pp. 234-5
and p. 4.
1 2

292 ISATAIT. [CHAP. XLV.
from the midst of Elam (wicked), | bring me out, and cause me to enter
into Bitanna,” | The will commanded by their divinity, which from days
remote | they had uttered, again they spoke to later people.’

This is a good specimen of the extravagance of fictitious prophecy,
and illustrates the reasonable demand of the prophet in xliii. 9, ‘Let
them bring forth their witnesses, that they may be justified.’

The second is of value, as showing how familiar the idea of predesti-
nation was to another Semitic nation besides the Jewish. It illustrates,
not only the passage quoted above (xlv. 4), but also xlix. 1, where of ‘the
Servant’ it is said, ‘from my mother’s lap (or, womb) hath he made men-
tion of my name.’ The same king Assurbanipal states at the solemn
opening of his Annals, that the gods ‘7% the body of his mother have made
(him) to rule Assyria.’

CHAPTER XLV.

Contents.—The achievements of Cyrus; the sinful murmurings of
Israel rebuked ; then, returning to the bright theme of restoration, the
conversion of the southern nations and of those who escape in the judg-
ment on the heathen world.

vv. 1-8.—Arrived at this culminating point of his first strain of
prophecy, the writer lingers awhile on the motives of the Divine favour
to Cyrus. Three of these are mentioned—(1) That he might be led to
acknowledge the true God, (2) that Israel might be liberated, and (3)
that the world might be converted from false religions. Then follows a
short song of praise.

' Thus saith Jehovah to his anointed, to Cyrus, whom I
have grasped by his right hand, to bring down before him
nations, and to ungird the loins of kings, to open before him

1 To his anointed] LXX. r@ (2) Thatit is but the least important

xptor@ pov; Vulg., christo meo.
Cyrus is the only non-Jewish king
called Jehovah’s ‘anointed one’
(Hebr. sdashiakh = Messiah), the
only non-Davidic ruler Det gratéd
(unless Nebuchadnezzar be thought
an exception, see Jer. xxvii. 6, xllii.
Io). It is a conjecture of Ewald’s
that the phrase involves a rebuke
to those of the exiles who, on the
ground of the ancient prophecies,
were expecting an Israelitish de-
liverer. Against this it may be
urged (1) That the ideal king of the
future is nowhere in the prophetic
canon called ‘the Anointed One’ ;

of the functions of him whom we,
following the traditional interpreta-
tion of Dan, ix. 26, call the Messiah
(or the Messianic king), which is
here allotted to Cyrus (see /. C. A.,
p. 166). It would be a more plau-
sible conjecture that the prophet
was looking forward to an inde-
pendent Israelitish empire to be
set up by Cyrus; for in v. 14 he
speaks of captives from neighbour-
ing countries coming to Jerusalem,
and later on of kings being the
‘nursing-fathers’ and humble vas-
sals of Zion (xlix. 23). The prophet
may have understood this; but

ISAIAII. 293

CHAP. XLV.]

folding-doors, and that the gates may not be shut: ?I will
go before thee, and will make swelling places plain ; folding-
doors of brass I will break in pieces, and bars of iron will I
cut in sunder ; 4and I will give thee treasures of darkness, and
hidden things of secret places, that thou mayest acknowledge
that Iam Jehovah, I that call thee by thy name, the God
of Israel. 4 For the sake of Jacob my servant, and of Israel
mine elect, I have called unto thee by thy name, I have titled
thee, when thou hast not known me. *I am Jehovah, and
there is none else; besides me there is no God; I girded
thee when thou knewest me not; ®that men might know

believers in revelation will not ad-
mit that the prophet’s view of the
meaning of this revelation is deci-
sive, To ungird the loins. . .]
i.e., to disarm, the weapons being
carried at the girdle or belt ; comp.
Ps. xlv. 3, Judges xviii. 11. So ‘to
gird’ wv. 5, means ‘to arm.’
FPolding-doors] i.e., those of the
cities which Cyrus attacks, and of
the temples. Comp. Baruch vi. 18,
‘the priests make fast their temples
with folding-doors, with bolts and
bars, lest these should be spoiled
by robbers.’

* Swelling places] Milton’s
‘tumid hills’ Doors of brass]
Babylon had ‘a hundred gates, all
of brass, with brazen lintels and
side-posts’ (Herod. i. 179, comp.
180). ‘The way in which the city
was treated would lead us to sup-
pose that its acquisition cannot
have cost the conqueror either
much time or much loss . . . it is
certain that the vast walls and
gates were left untouched’ (Grote,
History of Greece, iv. 287). This
remark is fully borne out by the
inscription relating to the capture of
Babylon translated by Mr. Pinches.
After the defeat of Nabonidus, Ba-
bylon opened its gates to the con-
queror withouta struggle(7..5.8.4.,
vii. 184). Prosaic persons may, if
they please, point to this as an
instance of the non-fulfilment of
prophecy. One of the psalmists
thought differently (see Ps. cvii.
16).—--Treasures of darkness|
Comp. the description of Babylon

as ‘abundant in treasures’ (Jer. li.
13) and as modvypvoos (Esch.
Pers@, 53). That thou mayest
acknowledge] See on xli. 25-29.

‘ Por the sake of Jacob... .]‘En
magnam sententiam vatis! Fata
imperiorum et regnorum mundi a
Deo disponi cum respectu ad eccle-
siam.’ Vitringa. A true exposition,
though the prophet clearly instructs
us elsewhere, that not only is Cyrus
for the sake of Israel, but Israel for
the sake of those who are capable
of ‘faith’ among the Gentiles. —
I have titled thee] viz., with the
honourable epithets, ‘ My shepherd,’
‘My anointed.’ It is the same
very peculiar verb which we met
with in xliv. 5 (see note).
When thou hast not known me]
This might mean, ‘ When thou
wast not a worshipper of mine,
and hadst no special claim on my
consideration.’ (So Calv., Vitr.,
Knob.) But in that case, should
we not expect the sequel to run
‘that ¢tow mayest know’ (or ac-
knowledge)? At any rate, it en-
riches the context to explain the
phrase on the analogy of xlix. 1,
‘From the bowels of my mother
hath he made mention of my
name.’ (So Del., Naeg., Kay.) For
Cyrus may in a manner be called
the twin-brother of ‘ Jehovah’s Ser-
vant.’

6 That men might know ....
‘Several important movements in
the direction of monotheism (no-
tably, the Pythagorean ...) had
their origin about the time of Cyrus’

294

ISAIAH.

(CHAP. XLV,

from the rising of the sun and from the setting thereof, that
there is none beside me—I am Jehovah and there is none
else—' that form light and create darkness, and make welfare
and create calamity,—I am Jehovah, the maker of all these

things.

8 Shower, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour
down righteousness ; let the earth open, and let *them bear

2 So Naeg.—Salvation blossom, Hitz., Ew., Del., Weir.

(Kay). Let us frankly admit, how-
ever, that the prophet antedates
the glorious prospect revealed to
him. He would certainly not have
been satisfied with ‘monotheistic
movements.’

‘ That form light... ] ‘The
alternation of day and night is
Jehovah’s ordinance; so also is the
alternation of light and darkness
in Providence, of peace and war,
of success and misfortune, of good
and evil. Comp. Lam. iii. 38? (Dr.
Weir). See also liv. 16, Am. iil. 6.
—Saadya (as reported by Kimchi)
found in this passage a protest
against Persian dualism,! and the
view has been accepted without
remonstrance by the latest critics.
No doubt it harmonizes well with
the prevalent fancy for ‘tendencies,’
and, if the prophecy were not of so
early a date, it would be impossible
to deny a degree of plausibility to
the theory. If, however, dualism
is referred to at all (which I doubt,
the language of the prophet being
so general), it is rather the primitive
dualism of the Babylonian religion
(on whichsee Lenormant’s La magze
chez les Chaldéens). As for the
earlier Persian religion, the inscrip-
tions of the Achaeemenide (e.g., that
of Darius at Nakshi Rustam)? are as
guiltless of dualism as our prophet
himself. But the form of the pro-
phecy is rather chosen with regard
to its application to Israel. The
‘light’ and the ‘welfare’ are that

1 See R. P., v. 151-153.

happy state to which Israel was to
be restored through (but not by)
Cyrus; the ‘darkness’ and the
‘calamity,’ the misery and woe of
the Exile (comp. xlii. 7). ‘Wel-
fare] Or, peace (lit., wholeness).
Calamity] Lit., evil; comp.
xlvii. 11, lvii. 1, and Jerome’s note
here. [One of the earliest Jewish
‘ Benedictions’ is based upon this
passage. It omits the word ‘ca-
lamity,’ however, because, according
to the esoteric doctrine, nothing that
God creates is evil.]—an these
things] i.e. ‘all that has been
mentioned ;’ not, ‘all this that thou
seest’ (comp. Ixvi. 2).

8 The appearance of the Shep-
herd of Jehovah, and the thought
of the blessings of which he is the
medium, inspire the prophet with
a joyous strain of psalmody.
Shower, ye heavens from above
... +] Parallels: Ps. Ixxxv. 11, Hos.
ii. 21, 22, x. 12. The form of ex-
pression is borrowed from the
Eastern religions, according to
which the fertility of the earth is
owing to the impregnating influence
of heaven. Comp. the Arabic
phrases mentioned on iv. 2 (Lasé¢
Words, vol. ii). Righteous-
ness] It is doubted whether
‘righteousness’ is here substanti-
ally the same as salvation (viewed
in its relation to the covenant-God),
or that human righteousness in
which salvation, on its moral side,
consists. The former is certainly

? Lagarde and Gustave d’Eichthal have discovered a similar protest in Gen. i. 3-5.
More tenable is the view that Mohammed contradicts Persian dualism in the opening
words of the 6th Sura, which strikingly resembles this verse of our prophet.

3 See also Lagarde on Astarte, Machrichten der Gotting. Gesellschaft, 1881, p. 398;
Robertson Smith, Zhe Prophets of [srae/, pp. 172, 409.

CHAP. XLV.]

ISAIAH.

295

_ the fruit of salvation,* and ¥ let righteousness shoot forth » at
once: I, Jehovah, have created it.

> So all versions.—Let it (the earth) cause righteousness to shoot forth, Hitz.,

Kay.

the case in xlvi. 13, and is in more
complete accordance with the ae
of the prophet ; comp. also li. 5, 6, 6,

——let them bear ...] The
suppressed subject is ‘heaven and
earth’ (Naeg.).——Have created

8; lvi. 1, lix. 17, lxi. 10, 11, Lxii. it] As xli. 20.

vv. 9-13. The sure promise of Jehovah is contrasted with the little faith
of Israel, who murmurs, not at the nationality of the Deliverer (as Ewald
represents), but at the tardy advent of the deliverance. The prophet
rejoins, ‘Woe unto him, who, though made of earth, and with no in-
trinsic superiority over others of his race, presumes to find fault with
his Maker, and to criticise providential arrangements.’ It is one of the
most decisive Biblical assertions of the Divine sovereignty. For the
image of the potter, comp. xxix. 16, lxiv. 8, and especially Jer. xviii. 1-6,
xix. I, 10, 11, Rom. ix. 20-24. It is extremely characteristic, and is
evidently based on the account in Gen. ii. 7. A potsherd among
potsherds of the ground] ‘Among,’ or ‘like’; lit., ‘with.—The
rendering, however, is only probable. The ideas of ‘among’ and ‘like’
are but loosely expressed by the preposition ‘with, and there is the
further difficulty (pointed out by Dr. Weir) of giving the same pre-
position (eth) a different sense in two successive clauses. Calvin re-
marks, ‘Id est quod vulgé dicere solemus, Que chacun se prenne a son
pareil, Testa cum testis contendat.’ But this ellipsis of ‘contendat’
is very harsh. ‘What makest thou?] Implying, Thou makest me amiss.
He hath no hands] i.e., he has no power (comp. Josh. viii. 20,
Ps. Ixxvi. 5) ; or, better in this connection, no skill. Calvin compares the
French phrase, mettre la dernidre main.

9 Woe unto him that striveth with him that formed him,
a potsherd among potsherds of the ground! Doth the clay
say to him that formeth it, What makest thou? or thy work,
He hath no hands? ' Woe unto him that sayeth to a father,
What begettest thou? or to a woman, What bringest thou

forth ?

10 Another figure expressing the
discontent which fixes itself on
“second causes.’ A child expostu-
lates with its parents for having
brought so weak, or deformed, or
ugly a being into the world.
What begettest thou?] It is not
said Why begettest thou? (as Job
iii. 11, 12, x. 18,) but What, either
as a question of anger, or an excla-
mation of -scorn.— To a woman]

Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and

Perhaps to emphasize the speaker’s
want of natural affection (Stier).

41 Jehovah here speaks without
figure. ‘Will ye be so presump-
tuous as to catechise me on the
future, or to dictate to me on my
providential arrangements for my
people?’ Stier mentions this view
as Calvin’s (though I do not find
it in the 1551 edition of Calvin’s
Isaiah), but justly asks how it can

296 ISAIAIL [cHAP. XLV.

he that formed him, Concerning the things to come ¢ will ye
question me°? concerning my sons and the work of my
hands ‘will ye lay commands upon me?4 !?It was I that
made the earth and created the men upon it ; my hands that
stretched out the heavens, and upon all their host do I lay
commands. ‘It was I who stirred him up in righteousness,
and all his ways will I make level; he shall build my city,
and mine exiled ones shall he send home, not for price, and

not for reward, saith Jehovah Sabdoth.

© Text has, Ask (or, question) me.
¢ Most render (or paraphrase), Leave me to care.

be reconciled with the imperative
in the first clause. Certainly it
cannot be, if the text-reading be
correct. Butis it possible to trans-
late the text-reading in such a way
as to satisfy at once the require-
ments of the context and those
of linguistic usage? Wherever
the Hebrew verb (¢zvvah) is used
elsewhere in this construction, and
with the sense ascribed to it of
‘giving over to one’s keeping and
direction,’ the subject of the verb
is invariably Jehovah, or some
superior (see, e.g., 1 Sam. xili. 14,
xxv. 30, &c.). It seems very doubt-
ful whether the words before us can
be used of man committing any ob-
ject tothe care of God. Thisseems
an insurmountable difficulty, for it
is clear from the context that we
have no right to suppose the lan-
guage of the prophet to be ironical
(Dr. Weir).—A very slight altera-
tion is required to reconcile the
difference between sense and gram-
mar, viz., to suppose, with Dr. Weir,
that a letter (7av) which ought to
have been repeated has dropped
out—no uncommon phenomenon
in the Masoretic text !_ The appro-
priateness of the rendering thus ob-
tained ts self-evident. Concern-
ing mysons| Adeepsaying. Je-
hovah implics at once that it must
be well with those whom he regards
as his sons (Hos. i. 10), andthat those
who murmur against him tacitly re-
nounce the privilege of sonship.

(See below.)
(See below.)

% The absurdity of such pre-
sumptuous conduct, the subject of
criticism being One who is the
creator and commander of the
universe. —-All their host] i.e.,
the stars, not the angels (Baudissin);
see on xl. 26, Do I lay com-
mands] Or, ‘Did I lay commands’
(ie.,‘I commanded them into
existence ;? comp. xlviii. 5). This
is not unsuitable to the context.
But the analogy of xlviii. 13 favours
therendering adopted. Comp. Josh.
nr. 12, Ps. civ. 4.

18 who stirred him up... |
The same phrases occur in xli. 25,
xhi. 6, xlv. 2. Not for price]
Not from earthly motives, but from
anirresistible Divine impulse. So
Josephus (see on xliv. 28) ascribes
the action of Cyrus to éppy res.—
It is quite conceivable that a lofty
spirit like that of Cyrus may have
at once obeyed the dictates of re-
ligious sympathy with the Jews.
The baser earthly motives (‘not for
price’=‘not for money, lii. 3) are
at any rate excluded in his case.
How far his resolution may have
been confirmed by a consideration
of the usefulness of such a faithful
advanced guard at the border of
Egypt, it is impossible to say. [I
leave this note as it was written,
referring for the necessary correc-
tions to the note at the end of
chap. xlvi., and to Essay xi. in
Vol. II.]

vu.14-17. The conversion of Cyrus, representing the north, is now
balanced by that of Egypt and the neighbouring countries, representing

CHAP. XLV.] ISATATI. 297

the south. In xliii. 3 these regions are said to be ‘given’ to Cyrus as a
compensation for his liberality towards Israel. Here, however, their in-
habitants are described as ‘going over’ to Israel of their own free will
(comp. mpoojAvror), and surrendering their wealth (impliedly for sacred
uses, as xxiii. 18) to Israel :—it is the same prospect which is held out in
Ps. lxviii. 31. The inconsistency is only apparent, the later prophecy re-
ferring to the Messianic period, when Cyrus shall have given place to the
Servant of Jehovah. According to Knobel, these Egyptians and Ethio-
pians are a part of the captives of Cyrus, who, the prophet anticipates, will
present them to the Jews as slaves, to labour on the new building-works
at Jerusalem (like the Canaanites in 1 Kings ix. 15-21). A prosaic and
most unsuitable theory. What we have here is simply a restatement of
the ‘triple alliance’ of believing nations spoken of in xix. 23-25.
Tfen of stature] Comp. xviii. 2, Herod. iii. 20.——m chains] With
a primitive love of symbol, these ‘proselytes’ put chains upon them-
selves, to represent the new bonds of affectionate reverence which attach
them henceforth to Israel. Unto thee shallthey pray] An unparal-
leled expression. It is not, however, to Israel as a collection of human
beings, but as divinised by mystic union with Jehovah (comp. on xliv. 11),
that prayer is to be offered. The prophet could not have said ‘ Unto
you shall they pray, but he can venture (for the conception of mystic
union was familiar to his readers) on the unusual expression, ‘ Unto
thee shall they pray’ (comp. Rev. iii. 9 with xix. 10). Delitzsch most
aptly compares 1 Cor. xii. 12, where Christ is used synonymously with
the mystical body of Christ, i.e., the Church. See further Last Words,
vol. ii. (Wet) surely] As in liii. 4; Hebr. ’azén. Thou art a God
that hideth himself] The Sept. paraphrases thus, ‘For thou art God,
and we knew it not. Following the hint thus thrown out, we may explain
the passage as follows: ‘Thou, O Jehovah, art indeed the Strong One,
but until now thou hast concealed thy strength both from thy people and
from us [or, simply, from us]. We in our ignorance thought that thou
wast only the weak god of a prostrate, insignificant people. But now we
are forced to acknowledge that Israel’s God is the absolutely Strong One,
able and willing to deliver (or, save) all who trust in him.’ The nature of
this deliverance (or, salvation) is indicated in vv. 16,17.—This explanation
seems to do the most justice to phraseological usage. The word for ‘a
God’ in the Hebr. is not Elohim (the Godhead), but El (the Strong One) ;
it is the same which is used in the phrase, ‘in thee is God.” The
expression ‘who hideth himself’? must be interpreted by the analogy
of other passages where its meaning is quite clear (see viii. 17, liv. 8,
Ps. lv. 1, and comp. Isa. xl. 27). Its signification, thus determined, is
‘who seems unmoved by the sufferings and the prayers of his servants ;’
it is, in fact, equivalent to ‘who holdeth his peace, and the verb ‘to
hold one’s peace’ is used in xlii. 14, lvii. 11, of Jehovah’s apparent
neglect of his people during the Babylonian Exile. Hence it may occur
to some to take 7. 15 as an exclamation of the prophet, suddenly struck
by the contrast between this bright vision and the glowing reality of the
closing period of the Exile :—in the words of Calvin, ‘Nunc exclamat

298 ISAIAH, (CHAP. XLV.
Isaias, longa patientid opus esse.’ This view is plausible, and if it were
not for the phrase, ‘O God of Israel,’ which follows, and for the abrupt-
ness of the transition introduced, it would be worthy of adoption. But
on these two accounts the verse must be a continuation of the speech of
the converted heathen, and if so, the phrase ‘who hideth himself’ must
receive a somewhat wider meaning than usual. This involves no violence
to the fundamental notion, which is simply that Jehovah gives no sign of
his operations, but whether from the point of view of Israelites or heathen,
must be determined from the context. In the above paraphrase I have
taken account of both points of view, but I am not sure that it was
necessary to do this; hence the alternative words in parenthesis.—
Delitzsch and Dr. Kay give the phrase ‘who hideth himself’ the sense
of ‘mysterious, and regard the passage as a cry of admiration by the
prophet or the church at the splendid and far-reaching consequences
of the Babylonian Exile. St. Paul’s ‘O the depth of the riches’ (Rom.
xi. 33) would be the best commentary on the text thus interpreted. But,
besides the objections mentioned above to a change of speakers, I fail to
see the requisite points of contact for this view in the phraseology of the
context.

“Thus saith Jehovah, The labour of Egypt and the
earnings of Ethiopia, and the Sabeans, men of stature, shall
pass over unto thee and become thine: after thee shall they
go, and in chains pass over ; and unto thee shall they bow
down, unto thee shall they pray: ‘Of a truth in thee is God
and there is none beside—no Godhead at all. 1° (Yet) surely
thou art a God that hideth himself, O God of Israel, saviour !”
16 Ashamed and also confounded are they all; gone into con-
fusion together are the artificers of images: 1 Israel is saved
through Jehovah with an eternal salvation ; ye shall not be
ashamed nor confounded unto all eternity.

15,17 The fate of the rest of the
heathens contrasted with that of
Israel and Israel’s vassals (comp.
vu. 24, 25). The tense, till the
latter half of v. 17, is the perfect of
prophetic certitude. Gone into
confusion] So ‘gone into cap-
tivity’ (xlvi. 2), and perhaps ‘he
entereth into peace’ (Ivii. 2), ie.,

into a state of captivity, of peace.
‘With an everlasting salva-
tion] The ‘everlasting God’ (xl.
28) cannot but give an ‘everlasting
salvation.’ But if so, the redemp-
tion must be spiritual as well as
temporal; otherwise Israel would
infallibly incur the same penalty
again.

vv. 18-25. The foregoing predictions are justified. The chosen people

cannot be rejected for ever, nor can Israel dwell in the midst of a desolated
world: ‘Israel shall blossom and bud and fill the face of the world with
fruit’ (xxvii. 6). The prophet, however, takes his starting-point, not at
the call of Israel, but at creation. Jehovah made the earth as a dwelling-
place for man. He then chose Israel to ‘seek his face,’ and to this
‘seeking’ he attached certain promises, viz., the salvation of Israel, and

CHAP. XLV.] ISAIAH. 299

through Israel of the Gentile world. Vw. 20, 21 are parenthetical ; they
contain a renewal of the invitation in chap. xli. to a debate on the
respective claims of Jehovah and the idol-gods. The digression was
suggested by the reference to Israelitish prophecy in v. 19, but the con-
nection is clearer without it.

18 For thus saith Jehovah, who created the heavens (Ze
is the Godhead), who formed the earth and finished it (Ae
* arranged it, he created it not as a chaos, he formed it to be
inhabited): I am Jehovah and there is none beside. '* Not
in secret have I spoken, in a place of ‘the land of darkness‘;
I have not said unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me as chaos ;
Iam Jehovah, who speak justly, who announce uprightly.

© So Naeg.—Established, Ew., Del., &c.

f So Del., Naeg.—A, Ges., Ew., &c.

18 Thus saith Jehovah] The
contents of this revelation are at
first given imperfectly. The main
point is not merely ‘1 am Jehovah,’
but ‘Turn to me, who am the only
true God, and ye shall be saved’ (v.
22). He is the Godhead] i.e., the
God of gods, the true God. Hebr.
ha-elohim (not haél, as in xiii. 5).
Arranged it] Like a lodging
forafriend. The sense of prepara-
tion is proved by Deut. xxxii. 6,
and (Hifil conjugation) xiv. 21,
Gen. xliii. 16, 1 Kings v. 32, vi. 19
(Naeg.) Created it not as a
chaos] i.e., not to continue a chaos
(Hebr. toh%; see on xxiv. I0).
Neither here nor in Gen. i. 2 is any
light thrown on the origin of a7.

19 Wot in secret] So xlviii. 16.
In a place of the land of
darkness] So in Deut. xxx. 11-14.
Moses recommends ‘this command-
ment’ as being both plain and ac-
cessible :—‘ It 1s not in heaven, that
thou shouldst say, Who will go up
for us to heaven and bring it unto
us... neither is it beyond the sea,
that thou shouldst say, Who will
go over the sea for us, &c.’ The
prophet, as it were, supplements
the words of Moses, and declares
that Jehovah’s Zorah, or prophetic
revelation, is not to be obtained
by any occult arts from Shedl or
the Underworld. For the phraseo-
logy, comp. Job x. 21, Ps. Ixxxviii.
12,—The best commentary on alt.

rend. is Jer. ii. 31, where Jehovah
pathetically exclaims, ‘ Have I been
a wilderness unto Israel? a land
of darkness?’ i.e., Have I not been
the source of light and happiness
to my people, and all temporal
blessings’ (comp. Jer. ii. 6)? But
it seems doubtful (to say the least)
whether the context allows us to
interpret the phrase in this sense.
‘A land of darkness, without fur-
ther explanation, cannot mean ‘ the
desert,’ which is only ‘dark’ (i.e,
miserable) to one who is not a
Bedawi. Seek ye me as chaos |
God is as far from meaning the
faithful ‘seeking’ of his people
(comp. Ps. xxvii. 8) to end in barren
‘chaos’ as he was from permitting
‘chaos’ to be the ultimate destiny
of the world. Comp. the passage
quoted above from Jeremiah, where
the ‘wilderness’ is an image of un-
remunerativeness.——Who speak
justly The heathen
oracles are as obscure in their origin
as they are unveracious and dis-
appointing. Those who deliver
them say, as it were, ‘Seek ye me
as chaos.’ But the revelations of
Jehovah are the embodiments of
‘righteousness’ and ‘ uprightness.’
So in the Discourse of Wisdom,
‘The opening of my lips (i.e., that
which J utter) is uprightness’ (Prov.
vili. 6), ie., never deviates from the
straight line of truth and righteous-
ness. ‘Speak’=promise, as lii. 6,

ISAIAH. [cHaAP. XLV.

300
20(Assemble yourselves and come; approach together, ye
who are escaped of the nations:—they are without know-
ledge who carry the wood of their image and pray unto
a god who cannot save. 7! Announce ye and produce it ; let
them also take counsel together: who hath declared this from
aforetime, and long since announced it ? have not I, Jehovah ?
there is no godhead beside me, a God that is righteous and
a saviour; there is none beside me.) * Turn ye unto me,
and be saved, all ye ends of the earth; for I am God, and
there is none else. * By myself have I sworn, &a just word
hath gone out of my mouth, a word that shall not return,®
that unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.

® So Sept. (virtually), Ges., Hitz, Knob., Ew. (virtually).—TexT has a super-
fluous dv which svoils the parallelism. Del., following the accents, renders it, A
word has gone out of a mouth of righteousness ; Targ., Kimchi, Calv., A. V., Naeg.,
Weir, better, A word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness ; (then continue,)

and it shall not return.

XXxvlil. 15. ‘Announce’ = prophesy,
as alii. 9.

2° Assemble yourselves... ]
See above on vv. 18-25.—The in-
vitation is addressed to those ‘ who
are escaped of the nations,’ i.e., to
the survivors of the great judgment
on the heathen enemies of Jehovah
which will immediately precede the
final Messianic glory : comp. Ixvi.
19, Zech. xiv. 16. They are
without knowledge] The truth
to which those who had escaped
could from their experience bear
witness. Who carry the wood
. . . | viz.,in religious processions ;
see xlvi. 1, Jer. x. 5, Am. v.26. The
phrase ‘to go after’ (some god), i.e.,
to worship, Jer. ii. 8 and often,
seems based on this primitive cus-
tom. Comp. the description of the
procession of shrines of Egyptian
gods in Wilkinson’s note on Hered.
i. 58 (Rawlinson).

*! Produce it] viz., any argu-
ment in support of the divinity of
the idols (see xli, 21). Right-
eous] Not in the forensic sense, but
= strictly faithful to His covenant,
and therefore a saviour both of Is-
rael, and ultimately of the Gentiles.

* Be saved] ie., ye shall be
saved (comp. vill. 9, lv. 2).

23 By myself have I sworn]
Jehovah swears ‘by himself’ (‘be-
cause he could swear by no greater,’
Heb. vi. 13), when the accompany-
ing revelation is specially grand,
or specially hard to believe. The
phrase occurs also in Gen. xxii. 16,
Jer. xxii. 5, xlix. 13 ; comp. the cog-
nate expression, ‘As | live, (saith
Jehovah,)’ Num. xiv. 21, 28, Deut.
xxxii. 40 (Q.P.8.). In the present
case it introduces the abolition of
the last vestige of nationalism in
the true religion.——aA just word
+ .+] Comp. ‘who speak justly’
(v.19). The clause occurs again
in Sept. after Prov. iii. 16, as the
first half of a new verse. Shall
not return] i.e., shall not miss its
aim (as lv. 11). Every knee
shall bow] i.e., in homage, as
1 Kings xix. 18, Phil. ii. 10. A simi-
larly ‘universalistic’ prophecy is
found in Dan. vii. 14. But though
the submission is universal, the
context shows that it takes place
subsequently to the great judgment
on Jehovah’s obstinate enemies
(see on 7. 20). Every tongue
shall swear] Carry forward ‘unto
me,’ and understand ‘ allegiance,’ as
in xix, 18; comp. Phil. ii. 11.

CHAP. XLVI.]

ISATATI.

301

Only in Jehovah, "it shall be said,” are righteousness
and strength; unto him shall ‘they come, and ashamed

shall be all those who were incensed against him.

In

Jehovah shall all the seed of Israel be justified and boast

themselves,

4 So Luz. (see crit note).—TExt, He (or, One) said unto me (Ew.); or, One

saith of me, Ges., Hitz., Naeg., Weir.

1 So some MSS., Sept. cod. Alex., Pesh., Vulg., Houb., Lo. ; one come, TEXT.

24 The submission of mankind
shall be unreserved and uncon-
strained. —— Only] Or, surely.
The two meanings are closely con-
nected ; comp. in the Hebr. Ps.
xxxix. 6, 7, Ixxili. 1, 13. It shall
be said] The text-reading (see
above) is very harsh. Perhaps
the easiest explanation of it is that
a mysterious heavenly voice, like
those mentioned at the beginning
of the prophecy, is suddenly heard
speaking to the prophet. —-Right-
eousness] The Hebr. has the
plural, ‘ righteousnesses,’ to express
abundance (comp. xl. 14), and es-
pecially abundant manifestation in
act (as lxiv. 5).——_Unto him shall

each one come, &c.] These are
probably the words of the prophet,
not of the converted heathen.
Taken together with the next verse,
they contrast the fates of the ser-
vants and the obstinate enemies of
Jehovah._— ach one] i.e., each
of the adversaries.

25 mn Jehovah] ie., joined to
Jehovah in mystic union (comp. on
U. 14). All the seed of Israel]
Including those who have, accord-
ing to vv. 6, 14, attached them-
selves to the true Israel. Comp.
on xliv. 5.—Be justified] lit.
‘be righteous,’ i.e., be treated as
such (comp. xliii. 26 in the Hebr.).

CHAPTER XLVI.

Contents.—A picture of the fall of the Babylonian idols, on which a
powerful appeal is based in favour of the true God. A further argu-
ment from prediction, and a warning to the unbelievers, conclude the
chapter.

vv. 1-2. The scene of this first paragraph is laid in Babylon. The
prophet is an imaginary spectator, whilst the most venerated idols are
thrown down by the conqueror and carried away in triumph. This, no
doubt, was in those times an ordinary event (comp. note on x. Io, and
see Hos. x. 6, Jer. xliii, 12, xlvili.7, xlix. 3, 2 Sam. v. 21), but Babylon had
thought herself exempt from the common lot of Oriental empires
(xlviii. 8)! (It is difficult not to think of the last strange journey of these
desecrated images ; comp. the picture of ‘The Procession of the Bull
beneath the Mound of Nimroud’ in Layard’s Wineveh and its Remains.)

1 Bel hath bowed down, Nebo hath crouched ; their idols
are given up to the beasts and to the cattle: your carried

1 get] Hebraized from Bilu, lord.

E , inscription quoted p. 305), or more
It may either mean Bel (as in the

probably Merodach (Hebraized from

302

things are borne as a load—a burden for the weary!

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XLVI.

? They

have crouched, they have bowed down together ; they have
not been able to rescue the burden, and their soul hath gone

into captivity.

3 Hearken unto me, O house of Jacob, and

all the remnant of the house of Israel, who are borne as a
load by me from the womb, who are carried from the lap ;

Marduk); comp. Jer. 1. 2, where the
two names occur in synonymously
parallel lines. The latter was the
tutelary deity of Babylon, which
Nebuchadnezzar calls ‘the city of
Marduk,’ Originally a solar per-
sonification, Marduk was afterwards
localised in the planet Jupiter,' and
later still, when Babylon had grown
in importance, identified with a
member of the supreme divine
triad—Bilu or Bel. Webo] The
Hebraised form of Nabu, the Baby-
lonian Mercury, and the patron-
deity of Borsippa. Nebuchadnezzar
calls himself once ‘ Nabu’s darling.’
The name undoubtedly means ‘ the
revealer’ (compare Hebr. abhi
‘prophet’); originally, perhaps, the
revealer or precursor of the Sun-
god (Sayce). Their idols] i.e.,
not the images of Bel and Nebo,
but the idols of the Chaldeans.
‘This is according to usage. The
suffix points always to the wor-
shippers of the idols, and not to the
divinities supposed to reside in
them; as in Ps. cxv. 4, Mic. i. 7,
Isa. x. 11, I Sam. xxxi. g’ (Dr.
Weir).-—Your carried things]

ie., the images which used to be
carried by priests and nobles in
solemn procession (see on xlv. 20).
These have now to be resigned to
common beasts of burden ; hence
they are said to be, not ‘ carried,’
but ‘packed upasaload.’ Accord-
ing to Herodotus (i. 183), the mas-
sive golden image of Bel (or, as he
calls him, Zeus) was carried away
by Xerxes.

? They have not been able to
rescue... ] For a moment the
prophet assumes the point of view
of the heathen, and distinguishes
between the deity and his image.
He means to say that if Bel and
Nebo had been really gods, they
would have interposed for the
rescue of their images—for surely
the massiveness of the ‘load’ would
not constitute an obstacle! But
no, they are not gods at all:—so
the prophet adds, their soul, i.e.,
all that there was of a ‘soul, or a
personality (iii. 9), in them, hath
gone into captivity. Comp. Jer.
xlviii. 7. ‘Chemésh shall go forth
into captivity ;’ so xliii. 12.

vv. 3-4. Jehovah’s providential care of his people—what a contrast

to the impotence of the idol-gods !
terms already used in vv. I, 2.

3 All the remnant... ] The
‘house of Israel’ is not to be iden-
tified with the ten tribes (Kimchi).
Throughout II. Isaiah, the captives
of Judah (not of course excluding
the Judahites who had been left at
home) appear as the heirs (condi-
tionally on their loyalty to Jehovah)
of the Divine promises to Israel.
‘All’ is prefixed to meet the case
of some timid Israelite hesitating

Note the meaning repetition of the

to appropriate the words of com-
fort. (Naeg.)——Who_are borne
... from the womb] The figure
of the infant and the nurse recurs
in Ixili. 9; comp. Deut. i. 31, Ex.
xix. 4, Ps. xxviii. 9 (and perhaps
Ixvili. 19, where St. Jerome ‘por-
tabit nos’), Hos. xi. 3 (‘I took him
upon we arms’). Tender as it
seems, it is inadequate to represent
Jehovah’s affection. The devoted

4 See Lenormant, La magic ches les Chaldéens, ed. 1, p. T2I.

CHAP. XLVI] ISAIAH. 593
4(and even to old age I am the same, and even to grey
hairs J will bear; 7 have made, and J will carry, and 7 will
bear, and will rescue.) ® Unto whom will ye liken me, and
make me equal,and match me, that we may be like? ® Those
who pour out gold from the bag, and weigh silver in the
balance, they hire a goldsmith to make it a god; they fall
down, yea, they worship. 7 They take it upon the shoulder,
they bear it, and set it in its place, that it may stand and not
remove from its place: yea, one crieth unto it, but it cannot
answer, nor save him out of his trouble. ® Remember this,
and *be deeply ashamed*; take it, ye rebellious ones, to
heart. ® Remember former things of old; how that I am
God, and there is none else—the Godhead, and there is none
like me; '°who announceth the future from the former time,

® So Joseph Kimchi, Vulg. (see crit. note), Calv. (nominally on the ground of a bad
etymology of text-reading, really from the true view of the context) ; so too Lagarde
(on paleographical grounds).—Text-reading is very obscure. Strengthen yourselves,
Targ., Rashi, Hitz., Del., Naeg.—Show yourselves men (? ?), David Kimchi, Auth,

Vers., Ges., Ew., Stier.

watchfulness of the parent naturally
dies away when his child has come
to maturity, and the parent is com-
monly removed by death when his
offspring has attained to old age.
Not so with Israel and Jehovah.
Israel is always the object of the
motherly care and affection of his
God (comp. xlii. 14, xlix. 15, lxvi. 9,

13). Hence the qualifying words
in v. 4, even to old age I am the
same (lit. I am He; see on xli. 4).
See a striking parallel in Ps. Ixxi.
18 (the speaker in the Psalm is the
personified people ; see v. 20, where
Hebr. text reads ‘us’), and cf. Hos.
vii. 9.

vu. 5-7. The images of Bel and Nebo remind the prophet of those
subtle Jewish idolaters (the ‘rebellious ones’ of v. 8), who thought to

worship Jehovah under outward symbols.

It is remarkable, says Naeg.,

that the prophet’s controversy with idolatry both begins and ends with
an attack upon its most refined form (see xl. 17, &c.).

7 They take it upon the shoul-
der ...] The images of Jehovah
are as powerless to help themselves
and others as those of Bel and
Nebo.

8 The argument for the sole di-
vinity of Jehovah (as opposed to all
idols, even those representing Je-
hovah) is about to pass into a new,
a positive, phase. But first of all,
the prophetemphatically commends
the negative proof just given to the
attention of his readers, especially
of the idolatrous section (rebel-
lious ones, as ini. 28). Then (v.
9) with a second ‘Remember ye,’

he repeats the argument from pre-
diction (comp. xl. 21-29, xlii. 9,
xliii. 8-13, 19-21, xliv. 6-10, 24-28)

® Former things] i.¢e., Jehovah’s
past mercies to Israel (comp. xliii.
18).——Z am God] Or, developing
the Hebr. name £/, ‘ the absolutely
strong’ (comp. xlv. 14).—The
Godhead] Hebr. Zohizz, ‘the ab-
solutely to be reverenced’ (comp.
Gen. xxxi. 42, ‘the Elohim of my
father .. and the fear of Isaac.’)

10 -Who announceth the future
. . + |] Who, from the very begin-
ning of a new period of history,
announce the far-off issue, which

304 ISAIAIL. [cCHAP. XLVI.
and from aforetime things that are not yet done; that saith,
My purpose shall stand, and all my pleasure will I perform ;
who calleth a bird of prey from the sun-rising, the man of
his purpose from a far country ; I have spoken, I will also
bring it to pass; I have formed, I will also accomplish it.
Hearken unto me, ye obdurate ones, who are far from
righteousness: '3I bring near my righteousness, it shall not
be far off, and my salvation shall not tarry ; and I appoint in
Zion salvation, unto Israel (I give) my glory.

stupid’ (comp. vi. 10). ‘ Hard-
hearted’ is also used in a bad
sense in Ezek. ii. 6; ‘stiff-hearted’

to human eyes is utterly incalcu-
lable (comp. on xli. 26).
A bird of prey] So Nebu-

chadnezzar is called an eagle (Jer.
xlix. 22, Ezek. xvii. 3). According
to Xenophon (Cyrvopf. vii. 1, 4;
Anab. i. 10, 12), the ensign of Cyrus
and his successors was a golden
eagle. ——Formed] i.e. purposed,
as xxii. IJ, xxxvil. 26.

12 Tt is as if the ‘ house of Jacob’
addressed in wv. 3 had refused to

in Ezek. iii. 7. A similar figure
occurs in xlviii. 4a. The paraphrase
of Henderson and Delitzsch, /es es-
prits forts, is too definite as well as
too modern.— Far from right-
ecusness] i.e., from the salvation
which Israel’s God has promised,
‘righteousness’ and ‘salvation’
being two aspects of one and the

same blessing. The ‘distance’ lay

listen to the Divine oracle. Jeho-
in the unbelieving hearts of these

vah, therefore, renews his address
in another tone. ‘Obstinate as ye Jews; comp. liv. 14, ‘be far from
are,’ he says, ‘ye shall not succeed (the dread of) oppression.’ Dr. Kay
in thwarting my purpose.’ Ye refers to xxix. 13.———I bring near
obdurate ones] Lit. ‘strong- . ] ‘For near is my salvation
hearted, which may mean either to come, and my righteousness to
proud, courageous (as Ps, Ixxvi. 5), be revealed,’ lvi. 1.

or, as here, slow of understanding,

Note on* Bel hath bowed down’ (xlvi. 1), and ‘not for price’ (alv. 13).

A long and important inscription in Babylonian cuneiform, about
two-thirds of which is preserved, enables me to correct and supplement
my notes on these passages. The clay cylinder on which it occurs was
found (broken) in one of the Babylonian ruins in the summer of 1879,
and is now in the British Museum. Sir Henry Rawlinson read a paper
on the subject before the Royal Asiatic Society, and his brother, Pro-
fessor Rawlinson, published an article upon it in the Contemporary
Review for January 1880. From the latter I copy the portions which
specially illustrate Isaiah. ‘My wide-spreading rule was peacefully
established throughout Dintir and the many districts of Sumir and Accad.
Their good order was not disturbed. The high places of Babylon, and
all its fortresses, I maintained in good preservation. . . . To the work of
repairing the shrine of Merodach, the great lord, I addressed myself. To
me (Cyrus the King) and to Cambyses, my son, the offspring of my
heart, and to my faithful army [the God] auspiciously granted his favour,

CHAP. XLVI] ISAIAH. 395

so that we succeeded in restoring the shrine to its former perfect state.
. .. Many of the kings dwelling in high places, who belonged to the
various races inhabiting the country between the Upper Sea (i.e., the
Mediterranean) and the Lower Sea (the Persian Gulf), together with the
Kings of Syria and the unknown (?) regions beyond, brought to me their
full tribute at Kal-anna (the central part of Babylon), and kissed my
feet... The Gods who dwelt among them to their places I restored
and I assigned them a permanent habitation. All their people I
assembled, and I increased their property; and the gods of Sumir and
Accad, whom Nabonidus had introduced at the festivals (or processions)
of the Lord of the Gods at Kal-anna, by the command of Merodach, the
Great Lord, I assigned them an honourable seat in their sanctuaries, as
was enjoyed by all the other gods in their own cities. And daily I prayed
to Bel and Nebo, that they would lengthen my days and increase my
good fortune, and would repeat to Merodach, my lord, that “Thy wor-
shipper, Cyrus the King, and his son Cambyses. .. .”’ This is merely
a state-document, and it leaves us uninformed as to the hidden springs
of action of the great Persian monarch. It is therefore still possible, in
Professor Rawlinson’s opinion, that he was actuated to some extent by
religious sympathy with the Jews, who certainly approached nearer to
Zoroastrianism than any of the other nations. There is, however, no
trace of this in the inscription, which contrasts strongly with the ‘ pro-
clamation of Cyrus’ in 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22, 23, Ezrai. 1-4. How is this
contrast to be accounted for? Shall we follow Ewald, who maintains!
that this edict was ‘coloured’ by the compiler of Chronicles and Ezra,
or Professor Rawlinson, who declares that no Oriental subject would
dare to meddle with a royal decree? Both theories are built upon
assumptions ; Ewald’s assumption being that the passages in 2 Chron.
and Ezra are derived ultimately from the Persian archives, and Professor
Rawlinson’s that the Books of Chronicles and Ezra are of the age of
Ezra.2 The former assumption implies a moral backwardness on the
part of the Chronicler which, though not incredible, is at least not to be
admitted without necessity, while the latter compels us to a non-natural
interpretation of the passage in chap. xlvi of Isaiah. The question is
complicated with the ‘higher criticism,’ and is therefore not to be settled
here, nor perhaps anywhere, unless indeed the original ‘ proclamation’ of
Cyrus respecting the Jews should one day come to light.

If the author of the inscription may be trusted, Cyrus was a thorough
indifferentist in his religious policy. As Professor Rawlinson puts it,he
was ‘so “broad” in his views, as to be willing to identify his own Ahura-
mazda, the Maker of Heaven and Earth, the All-Wise, All-Bounteous
Spirit, alike with the One God of the Jews, and with the CHIEF god of any
and every religious system with which he came into contact” He goes
even beyond the Assyrian kings in his universal toleration. Sargon, as
we have seen (on x. 10), did not really undeify foreign gods, and even

1 History of Israel, v. 48, 49. Ewald, however, evidently has strong doubts whether
any part of the original edict has been preserved by the Chronicler.
2 Professor Rawlinson, in the Speaker's Commentary.

VOL, I. x

306 ISATATT, [CHAP. XLVII.

arranged (under very special circumstances, see 2 Kings xvii. 16-28)
for the propagation of the religion of Jehovah ; but Ashur was to be
acknowledged by all subject nations as supreme. Cyrus, too, is bound
to admit that Ahura-mazda is ‘chief of the gods,’' but he interprets this
religious phrase ina most refined way. Every supreme god is Ahura-
mazda under another name—Merodach is Ahura-mazda, and so, we might
go on to infer in the spirit of the inscription, Chemosh is Ahura-mazda,
and Jehovah is Ahura-mazda.

It was a natural result of such indifferentism that the idols of the
conquered nations were left in their sanctuaries. Beland Nebo are even
admitted to a sort of inferior divinity in Cyrus’s syncretistic religion (see
the last sentence in his inscription). Yet the prophet evidently assumes
that Bel and Nebo will be carted away as so much secular plunder.
Professor Rawlinson, it is true, does not think this so evident. He takes
the passage to mean simply that ‘the old Babylonian and Assyrian creed
had sunk from a dominant to a subject religion, had become one of many
tolerated beliefs.’ Is not this a non-natural interpretation of the very
strong language of the prophecy? Why not admit that precisely as the
prophet in x. ro involuntarily makes Sargon to speak as an Israelite, so
here, from the intensity of his faith, he fails to realise the possibility of
religious indifferentism ?

CHAPTER XLVII.

Contents.—Song on the fall of Babylon, in four strophes or stanzas—
L, vy. 1-43 ID. vv. 5-7; IIL, vv. 8-11; IV., vu. 12-15.

HERE the thread of thought is broken (comp. xlvi. 11, 12 with xlviii. 1-8)
by a lyric outburst, proceeding mainly from that chorus of celestial beings,
traces of which are visible throughout the prophecy (see on xl. 3). It is
a ‘taunt-song’ corresponding to the ode on the King of Babylon in
chap. xiv., except that this has the imperative tone of higher beings,
whereas that was the emotional vent of liberated slaves. Ewald, regard-
ing the prophecy to which chap. xlvii. belongs as a production of the Exile,
declares that ‘though formed upon such models as Ezek. xxvi. xxxii.,
it ranks the highest poetically among all the similar voices of song
which in chaps. xl.-xlvi. find utterance’ (Dre Propheten, iii. 63). Del.
remarks, ‘Isaiah’s artistic style may be readily perceived both in the three
clauses of v. 1, comparable to a long trumpet-blast (comp. xl. 9, xvi. 1);
and also in the short, rugged, involuntarily excited clauses that follow,

1Come down and sit in the dust, O virgin-daughter of
Babylon ; sit on the ground without a throne, O daughter

1 Come down and sit] Parallel Hebr. has two monosyllabic im-
passage, Jer. xlvili. 18a, The _ peratives, expressing a decided and

1R, Ps; v. ISI.

CHAP, XLVII.] ISAIAH. 397

of Chaldza, for thou shalt no more be called Delicate and
Luxurious. *Take the millstones and grind meal; remove
thy veil, strip off the train; uncover the leg, wade through
rivers. % Let thy nakedness be uncovered, yea, let thy shame
be seen: I will take vengeance, neither * shall I meet any *
4» As for our Goel, Jehovah Sabdoth is his name, the Holy
One of Israel.”

5 Sit silent, and enter into darkness, O daughter of Chaldza,
for thou shalt no more be called Lady of kingdoms. °I was
wroth with my people, I profaned mine inheritance, and gave

® So Junius, Rosenmiiller (Ges. regards this rend. as the second-best).—No man
shall resist me, Symmachus, Vulg. (paraphrasing).—I will not attack (like) a man,
Targ., Kimchi, Caly, Auth. Vers. (comp. xxxi. 8).—I will not spare any, Ges., Hitz.,
Ew., Del., Weir (lit. ‘meet with friendly intentions ').—I will not supplicate men (for

help), Rashi, Naeg.
> It is our Goel, whose name is, &c.

unrelenting determination. To ‘sit
in the dust’ is here not, as in iii.
26, a sign of mourning (Ges.), but
of humiliation (Hitz, Ew., Del.,
Naeg.). Comp. ‘I raised thee from
the dust’ (1 Kings xvi. 2), parallel to
I raised thee from the midst of the
people’ (1 Kings xiv. 7).

2 The delicate virgin, emblematic
of Babylon, is summoned to per-
form the duties of a bondmaid.—
Take the millstones] The special
work of female slaves. See Ex. xi.
5 (with Kalisch’s note), Job xxxi.
Io, Matt. xxiv. 41, Odyss. vii. 104,
and comp. Van Lennep’s S2d/e
Lands, vol. i. p. 87. Remove
thy veil] Laying aside all feminine
modesty. First of all, however, she
must wade through rivers, i.¢.,
struggle as best she can to the
scene of her servitude.

3 A common image for the lowest
degradation ; so iii. 17, Jer. xiii. 26,
Nah. iii. 5, Ezek. xvi. 37, xxiii. Io,
29, Lam. i. 8. I will take ven-
geance] Here it is no longer the
chorus, but Jehovah who speaks.
These reverses of Babylon are
a just retribution; they are the
‘vengeance’ of an offended God.
Neither shall I meet any]
Any, that is, who can resist me.
The ellipsis is harsh, but is more
agreeable to the context than that
assumed by the rendering of Ge-
senius. Comp. lix. 19, Jer. v. 1.

(If it be a later insertion, see below.)

* As for our Goel... ] The
joyous exclamation with which the
earthly chorus of faithful Israelites
greet the appearance of Jehovah.
Babylon has no Goel; _Israel’s
Goel is Jehovah Sabdoth. [This
connection, however, seems a little
forced. The song would rather
gain than lose by the omission
of the verse, which may possibly be
a marginal note by a sympathetic
scribe, which has made its way by
accident into the text.]

5 sit silent ... ] Anotherscene,
drawing out a fresh contrast be-
tween the busy hum and brilliant va-
riety of Babylon’s former life and
her present desolation. znter
into darkness] The ‘darkness’
from which the Jews were just re-
leased, xlii. 7, 22 (Ew.).

6 £ was wroth ... ] The first
of two reasons for Babylon’s re-
verses. She had exceeded the
limits of her commission, ‘for I
was wroth a little, and they helped
on misfortune’ (Zech. i. 15). A
similar charge is brought against
Assyria (x. 6, 7). Upon him
that was aged ...] Is this to
be taken literally? The writings
of Jeremiah and Ezekiel do not
suggest that the Jewish exiles
were great sufferers. Perhaps the
prophet may refer to the cruelties
which disfigured the first days of
the Babylonian triumph (comp.

ISAIAH. [CHAP. XLVI.

308
them into thy hand: thou didst not show them compassion,
upon him that was aged thou didst make thy yoke very
heavy. 7 And thou saidst, I shall be ¢ for ever, a lady per-
petually : thou * wast not concerned about these things, neither
didst thou remember the issue thereof.

§ And now hear this, thou voluptuous one, who art seated
securely, who sayest in thy heart, I and none besides ; I shall
not sit as a widow, nor know the loss of children; but there
shall come to thee these two things in a moment in one
day, loss of children and widowhood,—‘in their perfection 4
shall they come upon thee, °in spite of® the multitude of
thine enchantments, in spite of the vast number of thy spells.

¢ So Hitz., grouping the same words differently. The pointed text runs, For ever

a Jady, so that (or, whilst, Weir) thou.

4 Suddenly, Sept., Pesh., Lo., Gr. (an easy emendation).
¢ Amidst, Kay.—Because of, Ew.—Through, Weir.

Lam. iv. 16, v. 12); or possibly the
conduct of the Babylonians varied,
according to the flexibility and sub-
missiveness of the conquered ; or,
again, the description may be sym-
bolical of the distress of the Jews,
somewhat as xlii, 22. Against the
un-Biblical view of Ges. and Hitz.,
that the ‘old man’ is the people of
Israel, it is enough to refer to xl. 28,
xlvi. 4 (with Del., Naeg.).

7 The guilt of Babylon is intensi-
fied by her reckless arrogance. She
presumed that the colossus of her
power would never be broken, for-
getting the danger of provoking
the God of gods. Perpetually |
Hitzig’s rendering involves no
change of the words, but only of
the grouping. The construction of
the Masoretic text is as awkward as
in the parallel case of Gen. xlix. 26
(see Q. P. B.) See crit. note.
These things | viz., thy cruelties, or,
the inevitable retribution attending
them.

8 x and none besides] In
form the utterance agrees with
those of Jehovah (xlv. 5, 6, 18, 22),
but the meaning is obviously very
different. There it is, ‘I am the
only true God ;’ here, ‘I am an
irresponsible despot.’ There is a
parallel passage in Zeph. ii. 15,
but it is questionvble whether any

inference can be drawn as to the
date of IJ. Isaiah. Sit as a
widow] i.e., in mournful solitude
(comp. Lam. i. 1), deserted by the
merchants, who once flocked to
Babylon. It is a figure from poly-
andry. Comp. xxiii. 16, and the
imitation in Rev. xviii. 7.—— Tha
loss of children] The people of
Babylon are the ‘sons of Babylon ;’
comp. li. 18-20, liv. 1, 4.

® In their perfection] i.e., in the
full extent of their bitterness ——
Thine enchantments] Babylon
was famous for its quasi-scientific
development of astronomy, astro-
logy, and all kinds of magic. See
Lenormant, La magte chez les Chal-
déens (Par. 1874), Chaldean Magic
(Lond. 1878), La divination et la
science des présages chez le Chal-
déens (Par. 1875); Sayce, ‘The
Astronomy and Astrology of the
Babylonians’ (Zrans. Soc. Bibl.
Arch, iii. 145, &c.), ‘Babylonian
Augury by means of Geometrical
Figures’ (of. ci¢. iv. 302, &c.); Baby-
lonian Literature (Lond., 1878).——
Spells] Comp. Ps. lviii. 5 (6), ‘the
charmers, (even) him that is versed
in spells and trained’ The root
means binding ; comp. xardderpos,
though we need not suppose that
‘magic knots’ are expressly in-
tended

CHAP. XLVIL] ISAIAIL. 309
10 And thou ‘hast been secure‘ in thine evil, and hast said,
None seeth me ; and thy wisdom and knowledge, they per-
verted thee, and thou hast said in thine heart, I and none
besides: ! but there cometh an evil upon thee, ® which thou
hast not the knowledge to charm away, and there shall fall
upon thee a mischief, which thou shalt not be able to appease,
and there shall come upon thee suddenly crushing ruin, of
which thou shalt not be aware.

2 Persist, I pray, in thy spells, and in the multitude of
thine enchantments, wherein thou hast laboured from thy
youth ; perchance thou wilt be able to profit, perchance thou
wilt strike terror! '? Thou hast wearied thyself with the mul-

f So Alexander, Naeg.—Hast tru ted, Ges, Ew., Del., &c.
& So Hitz., Ew., Del., Naeg., Weir.—Of which thou knowest no dawn, Vulg.,

Vitr., Ges., &e.

10 Yhou hast been secure in
thine evil] Obs. the prophet de-
nies any restraining power to the
religion of the Babylonians so far as
relates to their conduct towards
othernations. Among themselves,
however, they were in one sense very
religious,—SeroSarovéorepor. The
hymns translated by Lenormant and
Sayce prove the existence among
both the Assyrians and the Baby-
lonians of a genuine moral senti-
ment towards the gods.—Alt. rend.
does not yield a good sense, for
how could ‘evil’ or ‘wickedness’ as
such be a source of confidence?
And even if we take ‘evil’ as a
synonym for tyranny or for magic,
yet why should the Babylonians be
represented as saying, ‘ None seeth
us’? Surely ‘he who relies upon
his power or his cunning as a com-
plete protection will be not so apt
to say “ None seeth me,” as to feel
indifferent whether he is seen or
not’ (Alexander).

U An evil cometh] In antithesis
to the ‘evil’ of which Babylon had
been guilty (v. 10).——'To charm
away] The Babylonians boasted
of their knowledge—both mundane
and supramundane, but ‘knew not’
a remedy against this unforeseen
calamity. In the Hebr. this verband
that in the parallel line present a
striking assonance (shakhrah—kap-

prah).—Alt. rend. is, apart from
the context, the more obvious one.
But it is unnatural to say that the
‘dawn’ of a calamity means its
end, nor is this objection removed
by comparing viii. 20, lviii. 8. The
parallelism suggests a word analo-
gous to ‘to appease,’ and the Arabic
actually has a word exactly cor-
responding to the Hebrew root
(sahara =shakhar), and with the
required meaning.

! The last strophe has a strongly
ironical tinge, reminding us of
Elijah’s language to the priests of
Baal (1 Kings xviii. 21 &c.).
Persist, I pray, in thy spells|—
if one does not succeed, another
may; perchance thou wilt strike
terror, viz., into the enemy.

133 The multitude of thy con-
sultations] The ‘consultations’
here referred to are scarcely
astrological ones, as Sayce (Z. S.
B. A. ill. 150) supposes. The con-
struction of the sentence (comp.
also xix. 11) seems to show that
astrology is here the final resource
of the despairing Babylonians.—
The extent to which astronomy and
astrology were cultivated by the
early Babylonians and Assyrians
has been of late revealed by cunei-
form study. As early as the 16th
century B.C. it had become neces-
sary to construct a ‘standard astro-

310 ISAIAH, [CHAP. XLVI.

titude of thy consultations ; let them, I pray, stand forth and
save thee—the dividers of the heavens, the star-gazers, who
make known, at every new moon, things that shall come upon
thee. '4 Behold, they are become as stubble, the fire hath
burned them ; they cannot rescue their soul from the clutch
of the flame: it is not a coal to give warmth, a fire to sit
before. ‘Such are they become to thy loss about whom
thou hast wearied thyself ; they that have been thy traffickers
from thy youth—flee staggering every one to his quarter,

there is none to save thee.

logical work,’ which consisted of
70 clay tablets, and was deposited
in the library of the reigning king
Sargina or Sargon of Agane.——
The dividers of the heavens] Al-
luding to the signs of the zodiac
(of primitive Babylonian origin), or
to some other division of the sky
for astrological purposes. —-Who
make known, atevery new moon]
The calendar of the Semitic Assy-
riansand Babylonians was borrowed
by them from the primitive non-
Semitic Accadians. The Accadian
year ‘contained 360 days and 12
months, each of which is noted as
being lucky or unlucky for com-
mencing a campaign, attacking a
city, and expecting prosperity for
a fortified country or city’ (Sayce’s
paper, as above, p.160). The pro-
phet apparently refers to the reports
which the official astronomers at the
various observatories in the empire
were required to send in, every
month, tothe king. We still possess
many such Assyrian reports (Sayce,
p- 229), and there can be no doubt
that the later Babylonian empire

had the same astronomical and
astrological arrangements as_ its
predecessor (comp. Dan. ii. 2 &c.).
Some of the reports confine them-
selves to the astronomical facts ;
others expressly mention political
occurrences which the appearance
of the sun or the moon foreboded.

4 These wise astrologers cannot
even save themselves from the fire
of judgment. Not a coal to
give warmth] Not a moderate fire
for comfort, but an all-devouring
conflagration.

1° Thy traffickers from thy
youth] The only other friends of
Babylon, viz., the foreign mer-
chants settled in her midst, flee
in consternation to their native
countries ; comp. xiii. 14. On the
Babylonian commerce, see Prof.
Rawlinson’s Ancient Monarchies,
iii. 15, 16, Lassen’s Jndische Alter-
thumskunde, ii. 598, 599. The
prophet Ezekiel calls Chaldza em-
phatically the ‘land of traffic,’ and
Babylon the ‘city of merchants’
(xvi. 29, xvii. 4).

END OF THE FIRST VOLUME,

THE
PROPHECIES OF ISAIAH

VOL. IL,

THE

PROPHECIES OF ISAIAH

A NEW TRANSLATION

WITH COMMENTARY AND APPENDICES

BY THE

REV. T. K. CHEYNE,. MLA.

HONORARY D.D, EDINBURGH

ORIEL PROFESSOR OF EXEGES{S IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

IN TWO VOLUMES

VOL. II.

FOURTH EDITION, REVISED

NEW YORK
THOMAS WHITTAKER

z & 3 BIBLE HOUSE
1886

PREFACE.

—+—

Wirtn a kindly greeting to old friends and to new, I
once more introduce the second volume with a preface
adapted to the special nature of its contents. There
are many improvements in detail, but the character of
the book remains unchanged. It would be tedious to
explain afresh how this my ‘second Isaiah’ came into
existence, and why, with much reluctance and contrary
to the leadings of the past, I confined myself through-
out as much as possible to exegesis (broadly viewed),
and in place of any constructive ‘higher criticism’
simply inserted in the series of essays one ‘on the
present state of the critical controversy.’ So far as I
can feel the pulse of English students (and for German
reviewers I have a friendly word later on), the plan
which I adopted corresponds to their requirements.
Tired of the traditionalism of the older commentators,
they seem to ask, not indeed to be kept in complete
ignorance of critical problems and solutions, but to be
enabled to study the text in a historical spirit, without
(as they might express it) being under the dominion
of a fixed critical theory. A different style of com-
mentary, appealing to a smaller public, would have
its justification; criticism is the only key to the inner

vi PREFACE,

chamber of exegesis ; but I have the support of Prof.
Davidson (in opposition to a German reviewer) for the
opinion that the second Book of Isaiah loses less from
the student’s uncertainty as to its origin than many
other parts of the Old Testament. There are some
writers who seem only to care for ‘the higher criticism ;’
Jam not one of those. Pure exegesis has a fascination
of its own, and 1s a great liberalizer of the mind. Even
small details connected with the text have to me their
significance ; and hence, besides the ‘critical and philo-
logical notes,’ I have thought it worth while to offer
my gleanings once more in the ‘Last Words’ which
conclude this volume. The changes in both parts,
partly in the way of addition, partly of rearrangement
and condensation, will be at once apparent to the care-
ful reader. I may indicate, for example, the fusion of
two long notes into one (at pp. 296-9), relative to the
Cherubim and the Seraphim, though I hope I may add
that the more detailed discussions in the earlier editions
still retain their value. With all respect to Mr. le Page
Renouf, I think that he would find a few minutes well
spent in glancing at this application of the comparative
method. His remark (in the valuable paper mentioned
on p. 298) as to the failure of etymologists up to the
present time, must be due to the use of antiquated
books of reference.

Let me now turn to the eleven essays which explain
in some detail the general position of the work. The
original fourth essay—that on ‘The Royal Messiah in
Genesis ’—will not be found in this edition ; it seemed
desirable that the earlier editions should have some-
thing distinctive of their own. It was not inserted

PREFACE. vii

without an object; Isaiah, in his extant prophecies,
is so reserved on the subject of the Messiah, that an
early Messianic prophecy of the same type as those in
Isa. ix., xi., has a special illustrative value." The place
of the omitted essay has been taken by one on ‘ The
Suffering Messiah,’ as a further application of that con-
ciliatory method which cultured theologians may find
so fruitful in results. I am not myself as fond of
apologetics as of philology, but the need of reconstruc-
tion in this department of theology is so urgent that
I could not withhold a few seeds of thought. I am
thankful for the encouragement which Dr. Westcott
has given to the honest recognition of Old Testament
difficulties. By neglecting this heirloom of the Church
on the ground of its difficulty {so largely caused by our
own prejudices), we lose, not merely a part of the basis
of Christianity, but, to apply Dr. Westcott’s words,
‘just those helps to knowing how God disciplines
races, classes, individuals, who are most unlike our-
selves, which we need sorest when we look on the sad
spectacle of a disordered and divided world.

The alterations in the remaining essays are mostly
formal. I wish I could have inserted a discussion of
the chronology of the age of Isaiah; but the whole
question of the chronology of the pre-exile period awaits
a comprehensive handling. Would that an English

1 The rendering of Gen. xlix. 10 (which involves a change of reading)
adopted in the essay is—

The sceptre shall not depart from Judah,

Nor the staff (of authority) from between his feet,

Until he come for whom it (ze. the dominion) is appointed,
And to him be the obedience of peoples,

the meaning of which will be, ‘The dominion granted to Judah shall only
give place to a far wider monarchy, viz. that of the Messiah,’

Vill PREFACE.

writer specially marked out for such a work could only
find leisure to undertake it! For want of this chrono-
logical discussion, my reply to Prof. Robertson Smith
on Sargon’s invasion must remain in substantially its
original form. It should be taken in connection with
the revised introductions to x. 5—xii. 6 and xxi. I-10
in vol. i. In the latter of these I have emphasized
more the exegetical difficulties which make me hesitate
to ascribe xxi. I-10 to a writer at the close of the Exile.
I think that these difficulties have been underestimated.
It seems to me, too, that this prophecy and that in
chap. xxil. ought in future to be considered together,
since even in the case of chap. xxii. there are, not
indeed exegetical, but Assyriological difficulties in
admitting the authorship of Isaiah, I hope that no
word of mine will be thought to indicate either obstinacy
or partisanship in matters of criticism and philology.
It is true, I cannot take up an attitude of suspicion and
reserve with regard to cuneiform researches, but those
who do so will admit that Iam no blind follower of
the Assyriologists. Like others, I have been sometimes
shocked by their needlessly rash statements, such for
instance as my friend Prof. Sayce’s appeal to Cyrus
for ‘a most interesting testimony to the accuracy of
the Old Testament records’ (see vol. ii., pp. 304-5).
There is surely no occasion for a philologist to supply
doubtful arguments to the uncritical advocates of a
mechanical theory of Inspiration. May I add an ex-
pression of regret that Prof. Friedrich Delitzsch, who
has thrown so much fresh light on the relations of
Assyrian and Hebrew, should have challenged opposi-
tion and endangered results already attained by an

PREFACE. ix

apparent want of modesty and by not recognising the
various degrees of probability ?

Having ventured on some certainly not aggressive
criticisms, it is time to reply to one of which this volume
is the subject ; the reply may perhaps interest other
than German readers. The ‘friendly smiting’ to which
I refer is from Dr. H. Guthe in the Theologische
Litevaturzeitung of May 17, 1884. The reviewer
thinks that I have in Essay III. partly neutralized my
own endeavours as an exegete by mixing up the
thought of the prophet with the meaning which his
words came to bear in the light of certain events. That
is precisely what many English commentators have
seemed to me to do, and what I have sedulously and
expressly avoided doing. Dr. Guthe supposes me to
have said that a belief in the existence of references to
doctrines of the Church in Isaiah is ‘a mark of Christian
exegesis to which every philologist could assent’ ;\ but
the passage referred to simply says that ‘with this
striking confession’ (viz. that Isa. liii. impresses an
ordinary reader like a description of the life and death
of Christ) ‘ nothing zeed prevent even a philologist from
agreeing’; what has it, indeed, to do with philology ?
Vatke himself says, ‘The intuition’ (Mansel’s rendering
of Anschauung), ‘of the sufferings and glorification of
the Servant of Jehovah forms the most remarkable
presentiment of Redemption in the Old Testament, and
so is a prophecy, not a prediction, of Christ’ (Bzbdzsche
Theologie des A. T., i. 531). Watke was no Vermittel-
ungstheologe, and thought that the Servant in Isa. liii,

1¢Jenem Merkmale der christlichen Exegese soll jeder Philologe
zustimmen konnen, p. 195,

x PREFACE,

meant the people of Israel. But he would not have
joined Dr. Guthe in accusing me of having wilfully in-
troduced the notion of a sin-offering into liii. 10, for he
says on the same page, ‘If the people was considered
in its ideality . . . . its suffering could be regarded as
guiltless, and formed a voluntary guilt-offering.’ I am
aware, however, that my treatment of lili. 10 is incom-
plete, and freely admit (as stated on p. 307) that the
‘simpler solution’ mentioned on p. 51 (foot of col. 1)
commends itself to my judgment. That there is a
considerable element of truth—I cannot honestly say
more—in Kuenen’s (and Wellhausen’s) Pentateuch-
hypothesis has long seemed to me in the highest degree
probable, but it would be unfair, in the present crude
state of opinion in England, ‘to import the huge diff-
culties which beset this question’ into the exegesis of
Isaiah. It is possible that many English students may
soon advance as far as I have done, and then it will be
time to revise my exegesis of chap. lili. It is perhaps
worthy of remark that at the Church Congress of 1883
my attempt to show how unnecessary were certain
semi-theological inferences from the recent Pentateuch-
hypothesis was received without a word of protest.
Before passing on to Dr. Guthe’s objections to my treat-
ment of ‘the critical question,’ let me observe that I
have corrected a phrase to which he justly takes excep-
tion on p. 214 (p. 207 in ed. 2), which now runs thus—
‘the Servant of Jehovah emédodies a presentiment of the
historical Redeemer of Israel and the world.’ I think
there can be no fundamental difference between us ; but
I do fear that Dr. Guthe has forgotten his Lessing when
he wishes me to address English theological students

PREFACE. xi

as though they had enjoyed as much historico-theo-
logical culture as himself. After all, will any theolo-
gical symbols be less subject to criticism than those
which, though construed variously, satisfy most of us in
England?

Dr. Guthe’s objection to my treatment of those
parts of ‘ Isaiah’ where the standpoint of the writer is
that of the exile or post-exile period, shows me how
rare a thing ‘self-denying and theory-denying exegesis’
must be. To the theory of an assumed exile-standpoint
which he imputes to me I have nowhere given my
sanction, and English readers must know that I
have only referred to it so often as a theory just con-
ceivable in itself, and worthy of respectful treatment
on educational grounds. Had Dr. Guthe read my
earlier work on Isaiah (never recalled and not quite
unknown in Germany), he would have felt that I could
not have so sinned against light as to adopt such a
weak compromise between the new and the old. Had
he further glanced at the preface of the volume named
at the head of his review (p. vii), he would have seen
why no essay on the origin of the Book of Isaiah was
inserted in the present work, and where such an essay
from my pen, clear and precise, may be found.

The historical school, which, though in hearty
sympathy with Biblical religion, scruples to be influ-
enced in its examination of ancient writings by theo-
logical formule, is gaining strength in Germany ; in
England it is still painfully struggling for existence. It
is therefore not out of place to express gratitude for Dr.
Guthe’s friendly criticism, and for his recognition of the
‘independent work’ bestowed on this edition of Isaiah,

Xii PREFACE,

‘Independent’ study in any other sense of the word is
of course an impossibility; when popular writers of a
certain class describe some unlucky scholar as a copyist
of ‘German criticism,’ it is only a distortion of the
truth that all scholars of the present day, whether here
or abroad, are deeply indebted to their German prede-
cessors. For all this, the history of our science will
one day prove that the critical movement both has been
and is an international one. Free and honest Biblical
criticism is not confined to any one country, though all
thorough students must cherish a warm but not an
indiscriminating regard for the past and present repre-
sentatives of Biblical science in Germany. May the
Church in England, now that the decisive crisis is
at hand, not refuse to cast in her lot with a criticism
and an exegesis which have no party character, and
simply aim at a progressive insight into the true
meaning of the sources of our religion !

August 1884

TABLE OF APPENDICES, ESSAYS, &c.

Vou. I.

On ‘JeHovAH SapAOTH’ . . : ‘

ON xuiv. 28, XLV. 4... Fi : ; F

ON XLVl. I, XLV. 13. ; cj . . .
Vou. II.

On THE LAND oF SINIM ; : , . '

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES
Essays :—

I. The Occasional Prophecies of Isaiah in the Light

of History : ‘ :
II. The Arrangement of the Prophecies .
III. The Christian Element in the Book of Isaiah
IV. The Servant of Jehovah
V. The Suffering Messiah . ; ,
VI. The Present State of the Critical Controversy
VII. Correction of the Hebrew Text .
VIII. The Critical Study of Parallel Passages
IX. Job and the Second Part of Isaiah : a Parallel
X. Isaiah and his Commentators
XI. II. Isaiah and the Inscriptions . ‘ m

Last WorpDs ON ISAIAH . . . . . °

PAGES
II-14
291-292

304-306

20-23

135-174

177-186
186-191
IQI-211
211-217
217-224
224-235
235-240
241-258
259-268
268-288
288-294

295-310

ISAIAH.

CHAPTER XLVIII.

Contents.—A recapitulation of the heads of the preceding discourses,
from chap. xl. onwards, closing with a summons to flee from Babylon,
and a solemn declaration excluding the ungodly from a share in the

promises.

1 Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, who are called by the
name of Israel, and have come forth from the waters of Judah ;
who swear by the name of Jehovah, and celebrate the God of
Israel (not in truth and not in righteousness) ; ?for they call

1 © house of Jacob... | The
prophet, in the name of Jehovah
(see v. 3), first addresses the Jews
by their natural and as it were
secular designation ‘the house of
Jacob, and then subjoins their spiri-
tual or covenant-name of Israel.
But as both these titles would
strictly speaking include the ten
tribes, and the prophet is specially
addressing the Judzean exiles at
Babylon, he adds, and have come
forth from the waters of Judah
(comp. Ps. lxviii. 27, ‘ye that are of
the fountain of Israel,’ and the
analogous figure in Isa. li. 1),
Who swear by the name... ]
One of the outward marks of an
Israelite (Deut. vi. 13, x. 20). Both
this and the next feature in the
description are elsewhere charac-
teristics of true believers (see xlv.
23, xliv. 5). Here the prophet in-
troduces them ironically. In the
case of the majority of Israelites,
they are disconnected from a living
faith. Hence the qualifying words

at the close of the verse, not in
truth and not in righteousness.
‘Truth, literally ‘ continuance,’ ie.,
unwavering fidelity (so in xxxviii. 3).
‘Righteousness,’ i.e., the strict per-
formance of their part in the na-
tional covenant with Jehovah, es-
pecially of the moral duties which
this involved.! (The root-meaning
is, ‘to be stiff, tight’) The two
qualities, ‘truth’ and ‘ righteous-
ness, are combined, as in Zech.
vill. 8, 1 Kings iii. 6,

* For they call themselves ... }
There is a change of construction,
but the tone and the tendency re-
main the same. In wv. 1 the pro-
phet seems to be full of praise, but
the closing words make it but too
manifest that the eulogy is ironical.
So here. ‘Who are called by the
name of Israel’ corresponds to ‘ for
they call themselves of the holy
city,’ and ‘not in truth and not in
righteousness’ is parallel to ‘ Jeho-
vah Sabdoth is his name.’ In w. 1
it is mainly formalism, in v. 2 a

1 The sense of ‘righteousness’ for ¢edeg and ¢'ddgah, is almost always sufficient
in II. Isaiah ; indeed, it characterises the book,

VOL. II.

B

2 ISAIAH.

(CHAP. XLVIII.

themselves of the holy city, and on the God of Israel they lean
—Jehovah Sabdoth is his name—* The former things long
ago I announced ; from my mouth they went forth, and I de-
clared them ; suddenly I wrought, and they came to pass.
4 Because I knew that thou wast hard, and an iron band thy

narrow ‘ particularism’ or national-
ism, which is censured. Formalism
is reprehended by pointing to the
moral requirements of the religion
of Jehovah; nationalism by ad-
ducing that most comprehensive of
the Divine titles, Jehovah Sabdoth
(comp. vi. 3). Inparaphrasing wv. 2,
we may, without injuring the sense,
return to the construction of v. 1.
It is equivalent to saying, ‘ who ex-
press the strongest regard for the
city of the sanctuary, and attach
the highest value to their hereditary
religious privileges, not considering
whom they have for a God, namely,
Jehovah Sabdoth, who is thrice
holy (vi. 3), and who “is exalted in
(or, through) judgment, and shew-
eth himself holy through righteous-
ness” v. 16).’ [The ‘for’ at the be-
ginning of the verse has been very
variously explained. Some (e.g.
Calv., Kay) regard it as explanatory
of the preceding clause, ‘not in
truth’ &c,; as if the prophet would
say, ‘for they take a pride in the so-
called holy city, but where is their
holiness?’ According to others
(Alexander, Birks), it introduces
Jehovah’s self-justification for still
continuing to plead with his people:
—‘however much individuals have
fallen away, the national privileges
are still unrevoked by God.’ Others
again (Vitr., Ew., Del.) take ‘for’
in the sense of in fact, zv:0, Aro-
Jecto, which &z so often has in He-
brew. ] The holy city] So lii.
1; comp. lxiv. 9. This title of Jeru-
salem only occurs elsewhere in the
later books ; see Neh. xi. 1, 18,
Dan. ix. 24, Matt. iv. 5, xxvil. 53,
Rev. xi. 2, and comp. ‘Jerusalem
the holy,’ a common inscription on
Maccabean coins.—They lean]
Comp. x. 20, ‘but shall rely (lit.
stay themselves) upon Jehovah, the
Holy One of Israel, 7 truth,

* Whe former things... ] The
appeal to prophecy is repeated for
the seventh time.—To understand
this and the two next verses, we
must take them in connection with
vv. 6,73; there is an evident con-
trast intended. ‘The former things’
(see on xli. 22) were predicted to
Israel in order to prevent him from
committing fresh sin through as-
cribing Jehovah’s wonders to false
gods; it is an additional character-
istic that they were foretold ‘long
since.’ With regard to the ‘new
things,’ it is stated that they have
only been announced on the very
eve of their accomplishment, for if
they had been predicted centuries
before, Israel would have forgotten
the source of his knowledge, and
would have said, ‘It is a trite story,
I know it already’ (viz. through
another than the true channel—
either his idol-god, or his natural
powers of calculating the future).
—Suddenly] In both parts of
Isaiah the unexpectedness of the
events in which prophecy finds its
fulfilment, is emphatically referred
to (comp. xxix. 5, xlvii.9). Men hear
the prophecy, but it takes no hold
of them; they do not practically
believe in it, Still the prophecy
has produced this negative result,
that no one can ascribe the event
predicted to any other agency but
the true God.

4 Hard] i.e., hard of heart, slow
of understanding (comp. ‘obdurate,’
xlvi. 12). It is, in fact, a prophetic
doctrine that all actual rebellion
against Jehovah is preceded by a
loss of spiritual sensibility. Thus
we read that ‘the heart of Pharaoh
grew stiff, and he did not hearken
unto them’ (Ex. vii. 13); that, before
all hope of Israel’s conversion is
given up, Jehovah must ‘ make the
heart of this people fat’ (Isa vi. 10),

CHAP. XLVIIL.]

ISATAH. 3

neck, and thy forehead brass, * therefore I announced it to thee
long since, before it came to pass I showed it thee; lest thou
shouldest say, Mine idol hath wrought them, and my graven
image, and my molten image, hath commanded them. °® Thou
hast heard it; see it as a whole; (and as for you—should ye
not announce it ?) I declare to thee new things from this time,

even hidden things, which thou knewest not.

™They have

been created now and not heretofore, and before to-day thou

heardest them not, lest thou

and that in Ezekiel’s time ‘all the
house of Israel (were) stiff in the
forehead, and hard of heart,’ (Ezek.
iii. 7). The ‘heart? as usual in the
Old Testament, is here the organ
of the understanding and of the con-
science. Thy forehead brass]
ie., thou wast defiant and unap-
proachable ; comp. Ezek. iii. 8, 9.
A similar figure in a good sense,
127:

5 Therefore I announced it to
thee] Jehovah speaks as a loving
father to his rebellious child. He
takes the obstinacy of Israel very
calmly ; it is a reason, not for cast-
ing him off, but for showing more
kindness. He will at least prevent
him from committing fresh sin by
ascribing Jehovah’s mighty deeds
to false gods. —— Hath com-
manded them] i.e., ‘called them
into being ;’ comp. Ps. xxxiii. 9.

® See it as a whole] Behold
the prediction fully accomplished.
Himpel makes the accusative here
refer to the past history of Israel
as witnessing to a God who fulfils
His predictions.! This is surely
inadmissible. ‘Thou hast heard it
&c.’ can only mean ‘See as a whole
that which thou hast heard,’ and
the preceding verse shows that
what the Jews had ‘heard’ was
not their past history, but predic-
tions relative to the achievements
of Cyrus. And as for you...
This is evidently addressed, not
to the nation in general, but to
the individuals actually around the
prophet. It is thoroughly in the

1 Theologische Quartalschrift (Rom,

shouldest say, Behold, I knew

style of Isaiah, and of the old
prophets in general, who really
uttered their prophecies before com-
mitting them to writing. On the
whole, II. Isaiah is both in form and
in style intensely literary ; it is the
more remarkable that the writer
should involuntarily fall into ora-
torical turns of expression. ——
Should ye not announce it? ]
Ought ye not to make known such
a_ striking proof of the unique
divinity of Jehovah?—Hitzig, taking
the word ‘announce’ in the sense
of ‘predict, which it has in wv, 5
and xli. 22, 23, explains, ‘ Will ye
not predict something yourselves ??
But the context seems rather to
require an appeal to the conscience
of the idolaters.——1vWew things]
See on xlii. 9.

7 They have been created
now] i.e., they are now for the
first time brought (or beginning to
be brought) into actual existence—
hitherto they have only had an
ideal life, ‘hid in God’ (Eph. iii. 9),
in the Divine counsels (comp.
on xxii. 11). According to Naeg.,
however, (who does not mention
that he is but following Kimchi),
the word ‘ created’ is equivalent to
‘prophesied,’ since a word of pro-
phecy is in a sense creative (see on
ix. 8), and converts the Divine
counsel from a Adyos évdidberos into
a doyos mpopopixds. This is an
unsuccessful attempt to preclude
the inference which has been
drawn from this passage in favour
ofa Babylonian origin of II. Isaiah.

Cath.), Tiibingen, 1878, pp. 306-7.
B2

4 ISATAH. [CHAP. XLVIII

them. Neither hast thou heard them, neither hast thou
known them, neither did thine ear open heretofore; for I
knew that thou wast indeed treacherous, and wast called
Rebellious from the womb? % For my name’s sake I defer
mine anger, and for my praise I am temperate towards thee,
not to cut thee off. ' Behold, I have refined thee, but *not
as silver*; I have ®tested thee in the furnace of affliction.

© Not for silver, Ew. ; not obtained any silver, Ges.

> So Pesh., Targ., Ges., Hitz., Ew., Hend., Kr., Del., Naeg. (mentioned also by
A.E. and Kimchi).—Chosen, Vulg., the Rabbis, Calv., Vitr., Stier, Weir. (Rashi
tenders the clause, ‘I chose for thee the furnace of affliction,’ but against the

parallelism. )

Dr. Rutgers, with the same object,
attempts to show that there was
nothing in the successes of Cyrus
to justify such language in a pro-
phet living at the close of the
Exile. He refers to the (rather
dubious) oracles which are said
(e.g., by Dino, Fragm. 7, and by
Herodotus, i. 53) to have an-
nounced the victories of Cyrus.
Dr. Land replies, that it required an
unusual intensity of faith to predict
in such positive terms what we can
now, perhaps, @ fosteriord see to
be very natural. Was it not rather
to be apprehended that the Jews
would simply exchange a Chaldean
oppressor for a Persian ?!}—— Lest
thou shouldest say ...] See
note on ‘ The former things’ (v. 3).

8 weither did thine ear open]
A synonym for ‘didst thou hear’
(i.e., with the natural, not the
spiritual organ); comp. xlii, 19
(where, however, the verb is differ-
ent). For I knew... | Here
the same reason is given for the
postponement of the prediction of
the ‘new things’ which has been
urged for the early date of the
announcement of ‘the former
things’ (v. 4). There is no incon-
sistency, however. It is the ‘new-
ness,’ the unheard-of grandeur,
of the second cycle of predicted
events, which causes the difference
in Jehovah’s procedure. Israel was
equally ‘hard’ at both periods of
prophecy, but his guilt would have

been greatly increased by denying
the Divine origin of these won-
drously ‘new’ facts. ‘That thou
wast indeed treacherous] It is
difficult to realise the closeness
of the relation felt by primitive
races to exist between them and
their gods. This, however, is the
basis on which the Biblical doc-
trines of the relation between Je-
hovah and Israel, and between God
and the Church, are established.
See Mic. iv. 5,and comp. Hos. v. 7,
vi. 7, Jer. ili. 7, 10, Mal. ii. 11.——
Rebellious] The allusion is pri-
marily to the provocations of the
Israelites in the wilderness (comp.
Ps. evi. 7- 33). From the womb]
The accents link this with ‘ Rebel-
lious’ (in this case render ‘ art
called’); it gives a better sense,
however, to connect it with the
verb.

® But some objector may ask,
Why has not Jehovah taken sum-
mary vengeance on such an im-
pious race?——-For my name's
sake, &c., gives the answer. Be-
cause it would have compromised
Jehovah in the eyes of the heathen,
who are, in His own good time, to
become subjects of the Divine
King. Comp. Ezek. xx. 9, xxxvi.
21-23. Iam temperate] Or, I
refrain (it). The Arabic cognate
suggests the idea of muzzling.

10 ¥ have refined thee, but not
as silver] The precise meaning
is obscure. We may, however, at

1 Rutgers, De echtheid, enz., pp. 64-63; Land, ‘Prof. Rutgers en de tweede
Jesaias,’ Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1867, p. 202.

CHAP. XLVIIL.]

ISAIAH. 5

For mine own sake, for mine own sake will I do it; for
how should it be desecrated? and my glory I will not give

unto another.

12 Hearken unto me, O Jacob; and Israel, my called one ;

I am He, I am the first, I also am the last.

It was my

hand also that laid the foundation of the earth, and my right
hand that spread out the heavens; if I call unto them, they

stand up together.

hear; who among °them announced these things?

‘4 Assemble yourselves, all of you, and

He

whom Jehovah hath loved shall perform his pleasure on
© You, not a few Hebr. MSS., Pesh.

once dismiss the explanation of
Ewald (‘my refining did not result
in the production of pure metal’),
which is here ‘ purposeless’ (Del.).
(It is not the so-called Beth pretiz,
but the Beth essentiz, which we have
here. For the latter, besides xl. 10,
comp. Ezek. xx. 41, ‘as a sweet
savour I will accept you gladly.’)
But what does ‘not as silver’ mean?
Not merely ‘in a higher sense than
the refining of silver’ (Hitz. Del.),
comp. xxix. 9; but rather ‘not with
such uncompromising severity as
silver,” (so Calv., Vitr., Hengst.).
To have tried Israel ‘as silver,’
which, as a Psalmist says, is ‘ puri-
fied seven times’ (Ps. xii. 6), would
have been to ‘cut off’ the nation
entirely (comp. v. 9); Jehovah,
therefore, mindful of his covenant,
‘reined in’ or ‘restrained’ the
anger due to its iniquity.—The
beauty of the passage, thus ex-
plained, shines out the more by
comparison with the application of
the same figure in other prophecies ;
see i. 25, Ezek. xxii. 18-22, Mal.
iii. 3; Zech. xiii. 9 is more nearly
in harmony with it.—~2n the fur-
nace of affliction] An allusion to
the ‘iron furnace’ of the Egyptian
bondage, Deut. iv. 20. The pro-
phets regard Egypt as the type of
all subsequent oppressors.

11 For how should it be dese-
erated ?] Understand ‘my glory,’
by a ‘proleptic ellipsis’; comp.
Judg. v. 20, ‘They fought from
heaven —the stars from their
courses fought against Sisera.’ So

Ges., and formerly, Del. (in his
comment on Hab.i.5). Or, though
this is less obvious, supply my name
from v. 9 (with Sept., Vitr., Hitz,
Del., Naeg.). The verb will suit
equally well with ‘name’ (comp.
xxiii. 9), and ‘glory’ (comp. Lev.
Xviil. 21, xix. 12, Ezek. xx. 9, xxxvi.
22),——Unto another] i.e., to an
idol-god. So xlii. 8.

12-15 A still more complete and
more condensed summary of the
chief contents of chaps. xl.-xlvii.
The summons to attend to the new
and grand revelation (comp. xliv. 1,
xlvi. 3). ‘I am He,’ (comp. xliii.
Io, 13, 25, xli. 4, xlvi. 4). ‘The
First and the Last’ (xli. 4, xliv. 6).
The Creator (comp. xl, 12, 22, 26,
28, xlii. 5, xliv. 24, xlv. 12,18). De-
bate on prophecy (comp. xli. 1, 22-
28, xliii. 9-12, xliv. 7, 8). Mission
of Cyrus (xli. 2, 25, xliv. 28, xlv.
I-7, 13, xlvi. 11).

‘4 Assemble yourselves] Ad-
dressed to the idolatrous nations
(xlili. 9). He whom Jehovah
hath loved] Cyrus inherits the
honour conferred on the child
Solomon (comp. the Hebrew of
2 Sam. xii. 24, Del.). There is, it
is true, no verbal parallel for such
a phrase in the preceding dis-
courses, but the personal regard of
Jehovah for Cyrus has been clearly
enough expressed (see xlv. 4).
His arm] The subject is uncertain.
Is it Jehovah? is it Cyrus? Dr.
Weir remarks, with perfect accu-
racy, that it is elsewhere God’s arm
which the prophet refers to. But

6 ISAIAIL

(CHAP. XLVIII.

Babylon, and “his arm (shall be)’ ®on Chaldxae 11, even I,
have spoken ; I have also called him; I have brought him,
and his way shall be prosperous.

‘© Draw near unto me, hear ye this; (from the beginning
I have not spoken in secret, from the time that it came into
being, there have I been: and now the Lord Jehovah hath

4 His arm (viz. Jehovah's), Hitz., Ew., Naeg.
¢ TextT, Chaldea (see crit. note),

surely he has not thereby debarred
himself from speaking of the ‘arm’
of a human agent! (‘Arm’ = power ;
comp. Job xxxv. 9, ‘ they cry out by
reason of the arm of the mighty.’)
The form of the phrase is no doubt
peculiar. We should have expected
something like ‘and the lighting
down of his arm shall be on
Chaldzea’ (comp. xxx. 30), but we
can quite well supply the verb from
the preceding line. Alt. rend. may
indeed be supported by Ex. xiv. 31
(‘the great hand which Jehovah
did’) but ‘his arm’ is not a satis-
factory parallel to ‘his pleasure.’

16 Here the recapitulation of the
previous discourses is interrupted.
The prophet, in the name of Jeho-
vah, is about to put forth his good
tidings in a more striking form than
he has yet given them. But first
he must prepare the minds of his
readers by a pathetic appeal to their
consciences. Draw near unto
me] Jehovah is still the speaker,
but he addresses, no longer the
heathen (as in v. 14), but the Is-
raelites, especially those who are
‘far from righteousness’ (xlvi. 12).
The main point of his address is in
vv. 18, 19. From the beginning]
The passage thus introduced is
open to various interpretations.
The most probable seems to me to
be this—that from the beginning of
the world (comp. xl. 21, xl. 4) Jeho-
vah has ‘raised up a succession of
prophets, each bearing his own un-
ambiguous message ; “ and now,” as
the prophetic writer subjoins, Jeho-
vah has crowned his previous work
with this grandest of revelations.’!
Compare Calvin’s note, ‘ Testatur

Deum illum qui ab initio loquutus
est, peripsum loqui. Itaque sic hab-
endam esse fidem iis quae nunc Deus
per ipsum loquitur, ac si palam
adesset..—The phrase ‘from the
beginning’ may, however, also be
taken as meaning ‘from the be-
ginning of that historical period
to which the fall of Babylon be-
longs.’ Jehovah certainly claims,
according to the prophet, to have
foretold the future from primeval
times, but he also insists repeatedly
on the early date of his predictions
respecting Cyrus.——Z have not
spoken in secret] ‘ My revelations
have not been obscure and am-
biguous like the heathen oracles’
(see xlv. 19). From the time
that it came into being... ]
The subject of the verb is doubt-
ful. Most expositors think it to
be Jehovah’s purpose respecting
Cyrus. In this case, the Divine
speaker declares that not only had
He foretold the Persian victories
(comp. xli. 26), but from the time
that these announcements ‘came
into being’ (ie, began to be
fulfilled), ‘there (was) He,’ as the
director and controller of events.
But is this view quite consistent with
the latter half of the versc, which
so distinctly refers to prophecy? Is
it not more natural, with Ewald, to
take the words ‘there (was) He’ as
referring to the succession of pro-
phetic messengers, and as the sub-
ject of the verb ‘came into being’
to understand ‘ the earth’ (from v.
13)? ‘From the beginning’ will then
mean ‘from the beginning of the
world.’ It may benoticed in thiscon-
nection that the word-group ‘ there

VIC. A, p. 175.

CHAP. XLVI]

ISAIAH. 7

sent me and this Spirit ‘:) 7 thus saith Jehovah, thy Goel,

the Holy One of Israel, I am Jehovah thy God, he who

teacheth thee to profit, who leadeth thee by the way thou
f His Word, Targ.

I (have been)’ occurs again in the
description of the work of Wisdom
at the creation (Prov. viii. 27). (For
the ellipsis of ‘the earth,” comp.
viii. 21, Ps. lxviii. 15 in the Hebr.)
——And now the Lord Jehovah
hath] Here a fresh speaker is
evidently introduced, though his
speech only extends to the end of
the verse. But who? According to
Delitzsch, it is the servant of Jeho-
van, who has already been declared
to be divinely ‘sent,’ and to be in-
vested with the Divine Spirit. This
is possible, but not, in my opinion,
probable. A concise and incidental
utterance of this kind seems hardly
consistent with the dignity of this
great personage, while an occa-
sional brief reference to himself
is characteristic of the prophetic
writer (comp. xl. 6, xliv. 26, Ivii. 21).
So Targ., which interpolates ‘ the
prophet saith :’ so Calv. and Ges.
There is a partly similar transition,
pointed out by Del., from Jehovah
as a speaker to the prophet in lxii.
6.—It is difficult to see how Hitzig,
Knobel, and Naegelsbach can as-
sign the whole verse to one person,
and that person the prophet (in
spite of xlv. 19). If the latter had
only been sent ‘now,’ how could
he have ‘spoken from the begin-
ning’ ?——And his Spirit] It has
been much debated whether these
words are the subject (with ‘the
Lord Jehovah’) or the object of
the verb, i.e., whether the Spirit is
the sender or the sent. The Targ.
(most probably), Sept. (see Dr.
Kay’s note), and Vulg., followed
by the English and German ver-
sions and by Naeg., take the for-
mer view; Calv., Vitr., Del. and
indeed most moderns, the latter.
Grammatically, both renderings are
equally admissible,’ though the for-

mer is somewhat more obvious.
But as there is no analogy in the
O. T. for the Spirit’s being the
sender of a prophet (in 1 Kings
xxii. 21, 22, ‘The Spirit’ of prophecy
is himself sent), and as the spirit is,
elsewhere in II. Isaiah, distinctly
subordinated to Jehovah (see xliv. 3,
Ixi. 1, lxiii. 10, 11) it seems tomesafer
to take the words ‘and his Spirit’
= ‘with the Spirit’ (for the idiom,
see crit. note on vil. 1). Possibly
this particular construction may
have been chosen here to indicate
the personality of the Spirit, for I
cannot but think, with Kleinert
(who, however, makes ‘his Spirit’
the subject), that we have both here
and in Gen. i. 2 an early trace of
what is known as the Christian
doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Ifa
parallel for the claim here put for-
ward by the prophet be required,
comp. Hos. ix. 7, ‘the man of the
Spirit’ =@Opemos 6 mvevparopépos,
Sept. (The whole subject of the
O. T. doctrine of the Spirit is
well treated by Dr. Paul Kleinert,
in Jahrbiicher fiir deutsche Theo-
logie, 1867, pp. 3-59-)

17-19 A tender complaint that
Israel has not taken the straight
road to peace and righteousness,
but has obliged Jehovah to ‘lead
them round’ (Ex. xiii. 18), as it
were, by the rough road of chas-
tisement.—wWho teacheth thee
to profit) Deep down in human
nature lies the idea of a covenant
between the worshipper and his
god. In return for external service,
the god gives help and protection.
The prophets, with a generous
freedom, retain so much of this
primitive theory as matches with
the truths revealed to them. Je-
hovah’s protection is still condi-
tional, but the conditions extend to

1 So Origen ( Works, ed. Lommatzsch, iii. 244), though he decides on theological
grounds for this latter view, explaining that ‘ the Father sent both, the Saviour and the

Holy Spirit.’

8 ISAIAH.

shouldest go.

(CHAP. XLVIII.

'®©Q that thou &hadst hearkened® unto my

commandments! then would thy peace "have been® as the
river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea; '%and
thy seed would have been as the sand, and the offspring of
thy body as the ‘entrails thereof; his name would not be

g Didst hearken, Hitz., Knob., Stier, Del.

» Be, Hitz., Knob., Stier, Del. (the letters leave the point of time uncertain).

' So Rashi, A.E., Ges., Hitz., Naeg., Weir.—All the old versions agree substan-
tially in rendering ‘ grains (of sand)’; so Vitr., Ew., Del.

the inner as well as the outer man.
His terms are therefore more severe
than those of the idol-gods, but
the result justifies their acceptance.
For the idol-gods are, as Jeremiah
puts it (ii. 11), ‘the not-profitable,’
and similar statements occur in
II. Isaiah (xliv. 9, 10, comp. xlv. 19).
Jehovah, on the other hand, teaches
only what is ‘profitable’ (1e., in a
moral sense, comp. Mic. vi. 8), and
leads in the right way (Ps. xxiii. 3).
—— O that thou hadst hearkened
. .. J] This is the literal render-
ing. Some critics, however, are
of opinion that it does not suit the
context, that it leads rather away
from, than up to, the enlivening
promise which underlies the con-
cluding injunction. The samecon-
struction, they remind us, occurs in
lxiv. 1, where all critics are agreed
that the sense is a wish for the
future, and not for the past, and
that the perfect merely expresses
the impatient eagerness of the wish.
But, as Naeg. remarks, the two
passages are not entirely parallel.
The one refers to an action, the
other to astate. A form of expres-
sion suitable enough in the one
case would lead to ambiguity or
worse in the other. It is safer to
render as above, and the meaning,
though more subtle, is not inappro-
priate.—There is a similar and an
equally touching apostrophe in Ps.
Ixxxi. 13-16, where, however, the
construction is different, and we
must certainly render, not as Auth.
Vers. and (at least as regards vv.
13, 14) Vulg., ‘had hearkened,’ ‘had
walked, ‘should have subdued,’
&c., but ‘would hearken,’ ‘would
walk, ‘would subdue,’ &.——Tho

River] ie. the Euphrates (so
Targ.).——Thy righteousness |
‘Righteousness’ here, as so often
in II. Isaiah, means, not rectitude,
but prosperity, not however pros-
perity fer se, but as the manifesta-
tion of Jehovah’s righteousness or
fidelity to His promises.

18 As the sand] Thus the
ancient promises to Abraham and
to Jacob (Gen. xxii. 17, xxxii. 12),
and indeed those recent ones to
Israel himself (xliv. 3, 4), would
have been realised, as it were,
naturally. As the entrails
thereof] i.e. the fishes, which
have their name in Hebr. from
swarming (comp. Gen. 1. 20). The
subject in Hebr. is not always the
noun last mentioned ; it must in
this case be supplied from the pre-
ceding line. The word for ‘entrails?
is the feminine form of that ren-
dered ‘ body’ ; masculine and femi-
nine forms standing together as in
iii 1.—This rend. seems to me now
safer than that of Ew or of Del.
(The phrase is Spenserian.) His
name would not be cut off] Not
only would these blessings have
been attained, but Israel’s name as
a people would be secured against
extinction for all time.—But is not
this explanation against the spirit
of Old Testament prophecy, which
assumes, like St. Paul, that the
xapiopara of God are irrevocable ?
Are we not therefore driven to
Ewald’s way of rendering the pas-
sage? No; forno people can be
secured in existence beyond that
Day of Jehovah which marks off
one ‘age’ (‘é/am or aiwv) from
another. It is only a moral bond
of union which can soattach Isracl

CHAP. XLVIIL.]

cut off, nor destroyed from before me.

ISAIAH. 9

20Go ye out from

Babylon, flee ye from Chaldza; with a ringing cry announce
ye this and show it ; cause it to go forth even to the end of
the earth ; say ye, Jehovah hath redeemed his servant Jacob.
*1 And they thirsted not in the deserts through which he led
them: water from the rock he caused to flow down unto

them ; he clave the rock, and water gushed out.

22 There is

no peace, saith Jehovah, to the ungodly.

to Jehovah that his existence be-
comes absolutely illimitable. For
‘the coming age’ (to adopt the late
Jewish phrase) a special promise is
required (see lxvi. 22). ‘ Before me,’
i.e., under my care and protection.
—See crit. note.

20 The prophet, ‘becoming in
the Spirit’ (Rev. i. 10), sees the de-
struction of Babylon in the act of
accomplishment. Flee ye. . .|
‘Escape for thy life’ (Gen. xix. 17).
At a later period, the prophetic in-
junction took a different form :—
‘ye shall not proceed in flight’
(li. 12). ‘With a ringing cry]
The accents connect these words
with ‘ announce, tell.’ Vitringa, in-
deed, thinks this produces an im-
probable phrase—‘ announce with
the voice of song. But rzz2ah is
not properly ‘song, and if the mes-
sage were to reach ‘the end of the
earth,’ a ‘ringing cry’ would indeed
be necessary. The contents of the
message are the redemption and
return of Israel. Jehovah hath
redeemed] Not the prophetic
perfect (as in xliii. 1, xliv. 22), but
the historical. The Israelites have
now escaped from the fallen city,
and not only so, but received ‘the
earnest of their inheritance.’ These
great mercies they are to proclaim

far and wide (comp. xii. 4). In
fact, as we know from xlv. 22, ‘all
the ends of the earth’ are vitally
interested in the salvation of Israel.

71 and they thirsted not. . .]
Literalists will remark (as David
Kimchi long ago, with naive as-
tonishment, remarked) that no
miracle of bringing water out of
the rock is mentioned in the Book
of Ezra. But the picture is of
course symbolical. Similar figures
occur in xli, 17-19, xliii. 19, 20,
xliv. 3, 4, but here the emphasis
is laid more on the refreshment
vouchsafed during the homeward
journey, than on the blessedness
reserved for the true Israel after
their resettlement. The prophet
aims at showing that the restora-
tion from Babylon was as great a
Divine interposition as the deliver-
ance from Egypt (comp. Ex. xvii.
6, Num. xx. 11).—The last words
of the verse reminds us of Ps.
Ixxviil. 20, cv. 41 (see Hebr.).

22 There is no peace...
‘Peace’ (comp. v. 18) sums up all
the promised blessings ; from these
the ‘ungodly,’ those who do not
belong to the spiritual Israel, are
self-excluded. The same words
occur, in the manner of a refrain,
in lvii. 21.

10 ISAIAH. [cHaP. XLIXx.

CHAPTER XLIX.

WE now enter upon a new section of the prophecy. This is ad-
mitted even by those who, denying the unity, deny also the division
of II. Isaiah into three symmetrical books. In it, we hear no more
of the antithesis between Israel and heathenism, no more except
allusively of Babylon, no more even of Cyrus. Israel himself, in all
his contradictory characteristics, becomes the engrossing subject of
the prophet’s meditations. His restoration, still future, but indubit-
able, is celebrated in Chap. lx. by an ode somewhat similar to that
on the fall of Babylon in the preceding part. But the nearer the
great event arrives, and the more the prophet realises the ideal
Israel of the future, the more he is depressed by the low spiritual
condition of the actual Israel. Strange to say, this combination of
apparently inconsistent data—the splendour of the future and the
misery of the present—supplies the material for a specimen of
dramatic description surpassing anything in the rest of the Old
Testament.

The scene with which the section opens is a singularly striking
one. The Servant of Jehovah, wearied, as it seems, with the infatuated
opposition of the majority of the Israelites, turns to the ‘countries’
and ‘ peoples afar off,’ and unfolds at length, although not as yet in
all its fulness, his origin and his high mission.

It is true that here, as in the case of the parallel prophecy xiii.
1-7, many critics deny that ‘the Servant’ is the speaker, and assign
the soliloquy either to the prophet or to the spiritual Israel. Of these
two theories the former is the more plausible, as it does fuller justice
to the individualising features of the description. It is also confirmed
by Jer. i. 5, where it is said of Jeremiah, that before he came out of
the womb he was ‘ known,’ ‘consecrated,’ and ‘ ordained’ of Jehovah.
The drawback, however, to this comparison is that Jeremiah does not,
like the speaker in xlix. 1, presume to state this of himself ; it is in
‘the word of Jehovah’ which ‘came tohim.’ Besides, the greatcr part
of what the speaker says is so grand and so self-assertive that no
prophet, least of all such a reticent prophet as the author, can be
imagined as uttering it. The latter theory has but one point in its
favour—the second line of v. 3, and this no doubt is at first sight
conclusive. It is opposed however by 77. 5, 6, which unmistakeably
refer to the spiritual Israel, and expressly distinguish it from the
Servant of Jehovah. The only other theory worth mentioning is that
which regards the speaker as that human yet superhuman personage

CHAP. XLIX.] ISATAH. II
to whom the latter appellation belongs. All the conflicting data at
once fall into their proper places when we accept this explanation.
Our only reasonable doubt will be connected with the surprising
statement in zv. 2, ‘ Thou art my servant, (thou art) Israel with whom
I will beautify myself.’ How can this be? How can the speaker be
destined to bring Israel back to Jehovah, &c., and at the same time
himself be Israel ?!

It is perhaps a riddle of a kind not unrepresented elsewhere
in the Old Testament—a riddle like the ‘I am’ of Ex. iii. 14, and like
the ‘dwelling in the house of Jehovah all the days of my life’ (Ps.
xxvii. 4), and of which a satisfactory solution was early found, viz.,
that the speaker is called Israel as being the noblest and truest repre-
sentative of the people of Israel. So Ibn Ezra, though the speaker,
according to him, is not the prophet but the Servant ; so too Delitzsch,
who considers the personal Servant to be as it were the apex of a
pyramid, of which Israel in its entirety forms the basis, and the ideal
or spiritual Israel the centre. Sotoo De Dieu, Vitringa, Naegelsbach,
and Birks, who explain v. 34 as an allusion to Gen. xxxii. 29, and as
meaning, in the words of Vitringa, ‘Tu es Israel, inter omnes veros
Israelitas unus et solus, qui in te vere exhibiturus es characteres
omnes patris tui Jacobi, qui cum Deo ipso luctatus vicit .. hac
ipsa de caussA meritus appellari Israel.’ There is indeed no other
instance of the antitypical use of the name Israel (like that of David
and, in St. Paul, of Adam). But why should not this ‘Israelite
indeed’ be ‘honourably titled’ by this name as well as Jacob’s
spiritual seed in xliv. 5?

Contents.-—The Servant’s declaration concerning his intercourse with
Jehovah, his functions, and his experience (vv. 1-13) ; Zion comforted
in her despondency (vv, 14-26).

1Hearken, ye countries, unto me, and listen, ye far-off
peoples: Jehovah hath called me from the womb, from my
mother’s lap hath he made mention of my name; %and he

1 Hearken, ye countries, unto
me... This is no mere
rhetorical phrase. The ‘countries’
and the ‘nations’ fell within the
scope of the Servant’s original com-
mission (xliil. 1, 4, 6). From the
womb] i.e., I was predestinated to
my missionary office. Comp. Jer.
i. 5, Gal. i. 15, and note at end of
chap. xii.

2 Me made my mouth...
i.e., he endowed my word with his
own omnipotence, so that it puts
down all opposition, just as his
word. Soin li. 16, ‘the word of
the LoRD, which is put into the
mouth of the Servant, is so living
and powerful, so borne by omnipo-
tence, that thereby the heavens are
planted, and the foundations of the

' It is enough to chronicle the suggestion of Gesenius, in his note on v. 3, that the
word ‘ Israel’ may be an interpolation (like ‘Israel’ and ‘Jacob’ in the Sept. of xlii.
1). In the notes to his translation of Isaiah (2nd ed. 1829) he retracted this view.

12 ISAIAH.

(CHAP. XLIX.

made my mouth as a sharp sword, in the shadow of his hand
he hid me; and he made mea polished shaft, in his quiver
he covered me: and he said unto me, Thou art my servant ;

(even) Israel, with whom I will beautify myself.

4But 7

had said, I have laboured in vain, for nought and for a
breath have I spent my strength; but surely my right is

with Jehovah, and my recompence with my God.

earth are laid.” So too in xi. 4
(see note) it is said of the Messianic
king that ‘he shall smite the tyrant
with the sceptre of his mouth,’
Comp. also Heb. iv. 12, Eph. vi.
17, and the passages in Revelation
(i. 16, xix. 15) based upon this
imaginative description of the Ser-
vant. He hid me] The incisive
preaching of the Servant was dis-
pleasing to the natural man, who
therefore sought to parry the sword
of the Spirit by the arm of flesh.
Hence not only the ‘mouth,’ but
the entire person of the preacher
needed the Divine protection.
And he made me a polished
shaft] The whole soul of the pro-
phet is absorbed in his message ;
he is all mouth—a ‘ mouth of God’
(Ex. iv. 16, comp. vil. 1). ‘ Po-
lished, so as to penetrate easily ;
comp. Jer. li. II.

3 Andhe said...] ‘And’ is
explanatory. Jehovah tells His
Servant why He watches over him
with such solicitude. It is because
he is His precious instrument, and
because in and through him He
designs to manifest His glory. The
Servant will become the head of a
regenerated and expanded Israel,
which Jehovah will hold forth to
the universe as His fairest prize
(Ixii. 3).—The phrase at the end of
the verse is repeated from xliv. 23.

4 put / bad said...] ‘My
thoughts were very different—ever
ready to sink into dejection and
despair. And if I struggle against
this, the utmost I can reach and
rise to is to cast myself upon God’s
judgment, and to leave all in His
hands” So Dr. Weir. But this is
far from doing justice to the firm
faith of the closing words. The

5 And

Servant of Jehovah may indeed
give way to dejection, but only for
amoment. His cry of pain and
astonishment does but show that
he is a man—a historical person,
and is as consistent with a deeply-
rooted faith as the ‘Eli, Eli’ of
Ps, xxii. 1, Matt. xxvii. 46. Directly
after relieving his feelings by the
cry, ‘I have laboured in vain,’ he
gives the lie, with a ‘but surely,’
to all delusive appearances, and
with the bold declaration, ‘my re-
compence is with my God,’ appeals
to the impending interposition of
the Divine Judge (comp. xl. 10).—
The scene of this seemingly result-
less labour is evidently Israel, not
the heathen world (see v. 6). Ina
subsequent chapter we find Zion
giving utterance to a complaint
corresponding to the exclamation
of the Servant (see on li 14).——
My right] The expression reminds
us of xl. 27, where Israel com-
plains, ‘ My right has been let slip
by my God.’ There, however, the
‘right’ is clearly that of an op-
pressed nation as against its op-
pressors ; here it is the ‘right’ of
an envoy from the King of Israel
to be received with heartfelt sub-
mission. The work of the Servant
is described under the same figure
of a judicial pleading in 1. 8.
My recompence] What this re-
compence is, will appear in liii.
10-12. ‘The mention of a ‘ recom-
pence’ of itself shows that ‘ser-
vant’ in the phrase ‘the Servant
(literally slave) of Jehovah’ has a
special meaning of its own. A
slave can have no recompence.

° And now Jehovah hath
said . ‘And? is again ex-
planatory. Jehovah has rewarded

CHAP, XLIX.] ISAIAH. 13
now Jehovah hath said, he who formed me from the womb to
be a servant unto him, that I might bring back Jacob unto
him, and that Israel might *unto him* be gathered, (for I
am honoured in the eyes of Jehovah, and my God is become
my strength,) ®he hath said, It is too light a thing that thou
art unto me a servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and
to restore the preserved of Israel; so I appoint thee the
light of the nations, ® to be my salvation unto the end of

the earth.

™Thus saith Jehovah, the Goel of Israel, and his Holy

* So Heb. marg. some MSS., Aquila, Pesh. (virtually), Targ., Lo., Vitr., Ges.,

Ew., Del., Naeg., Weir.—Not, Heb. Text,
(The following verb is variously rendered ;

Hend., Hitz., Hengst., Alexander, Kay.
see crit. note.)

Vulg., Symm., Theod., Calv., De Dieu,

> So Sept., Vulg., Vitr., Hengst., Del., Naeg., Weir.—That my salvation may be,

Ges., Hitz., Ew. (Weir is uncertain).

the Servant’s recent exercise of
faith by a fresh revelation. But
before announcing it, the Servant
joyfully repeats the facts which
have ever lain deep down in his
consciousness, though obscured for
a moment by despondency, viz.
that he is Jehovah’s predestined
instrument for the restoration of
the Chosen People. ‘ To bring
back’ (i.e., that I may bring back)
at any rate includes a spiritual re-
ference. See on xlii. 7, and comp.
the use of ‘to return’ in I. Isaiah
(i. 27, Vi. 10, X. 20-22, xxx. I5).—
Alt. rend. entirely spoils the sym-
metry of the verse (analogous cases
in ix. 2, lxili. 9)——¥For § am
honoured... ] Lit. ‘and, &c.’;
the ‘and’ is explanatory of the
circumstance that a new Divine
revelation has been accorded to the
Servant. He now feels that he is
honoured (the imperfect tense may
be chosen as being the tense of
emotion) in the eyes of God if not
in those of men, and consequently
his despondency gives place to a
sense of an indwelling Divine
strength.

® This is what he has been long-
ing to say, (for it concerns the far
countries so much,) but seems to
have feared to bring out too hastily
—-so wondrous is it! It is too
light « thing. .] Even the

restoration of Israel is a ‘light
thing’ by comparison with the
exalted privilege of bringing all
mankind to the knowledge of the
true God.— The tribes of Jacob
(i.e., Israel)] The prophet retains
the old-fashioned phrase, precisely
as the New Testament writers
(Matt. xix. 28, Rev. vii. 4). The
parallel clause has simply the pre-
served of Israel, i.e., those who
in I. Isaiah (e.g., x. 20) are called
the ‘remnant,’ with reference to the
great judgment upon Israel.
The light ..] Comp. xlii. 6.
—— To be my salvation] i.e., the
bearer of my salvation (as the
Messiah is called ‘ peace,’ i.e., ‘the
author of peace,’ Mic. v. 5).—Alt.
rend. is equally possible grammati-
cally, and harmonizes better with
the theory that the people of Israel
isthe speaker. But the parallelism
favours the first rendering.

78 A further revelation of Jeho-
vah, rewarding the revived faith of
his Servant. It is a kind of pre-
lude of chap. liii. Nowhere else,
except in that famous chapter, are
the humiliation and subsequent
glorification of this great personage
so emphatically dwelt upon.

The Goel of Israel] (See on
xli. 14.) Israel and the greatest of
Israel’s saplings (liii. 2) are indis-
solubly united. Is the ‘ Servant’

14 ISAIAH.

[CHAP. XLIX.

One, unto him who is «despised ‘of souls,’ abhorred of ¢ the
people,* a servant of rulers: kings shall see and rise up;

ae Despicable, Calv., Del.
Thy Wuxnv avrov, i.e. bdzeh.)

4 (a) Of persons, Targ. (virtually), Auth. Vers., Ges., Hengst., Knobel.
(y) As to (his) soul, Hitz., Del. (see crit. note),
¢ Peoples, Sept., Saadya, A.E., Kimchi, Luzzatto (as if a collective

soul, Calv., Vitr., Ew., Naeg., Weir.

reduced to low estate? So, too, is
Israel. Is the‘ Servant’ appointed
for a glorious issue? Those who
are mystically joined to him shall
share his prosperity. ——His Holy
One] ‘ Holiness’ is closely related
to the idea of strength, comp. xxix.
19. Who is despised of souls]
i.e, whom men heartily despise.
The obscurity of this expression is
chiefly owing to the circumstance
that the Hebr. has, not ‘souls,’ but
‘soul’ (zfesh). ‘ Despised of soul’
(if we interpret éfesh as a singular)
may be explained in two ways (see
B and y in note4), of which the first
seems to me the more plausible—
comp. the phrase ‘desire of soul’ =
‘deep desire’ (xxvi. 8), and ‘myene-
mies in soul’ = ‘my deadly enemies’
(as A. V. Ps. xvii. 9). The soul is
in Biblical language the seat of the
deepest feelings and affections (the
Gemitth), of pleasure and_ pain,
desire and disgust, love and hate,
admiration and contempt; con-
tempt, in particular, is again con-
nected with the soul in Ezek. xxxvi.
s, ‘with the joy of a full heart, with
despite of the soul’ On the other
hand, the rend. of those who take
ncfesh collectively is recommended
by its accordance with the parallel
members of the verse (‘. . . people

rulers’), and by the parallel
passage in Ps. xxii. (a psalm so
strikingly germane to this para-
graph and to Isa. liil.), in which
the pious sufferer is called ‘a re-
proach of men and despised of the
people’ (v. 6) ; while the rend. ‘ per-
sons’ is justified by the common
phrase ‘every soul’ for ‘every per-
son, and by Gen, xii. 5, xiv. 21,
Ezek. xxvii. 13 (where the singular
is used, as here, collectively). Still,
though the parallelism imperatively
demands a collective reference,

(Vulg., contemptibilem animam ; Sept. tov davaigovra

(8) In the

‘soul’ in the sense of ‘person’
seems to me to belong specially to
phrases and formule (see instances
in Lexicon), and to be altogether
too mean a word for those who are
in the position of tyrants. I there-
fore agree grammatically with Ge-
senius, and exegetically with Ewald.
—The rend. of Hitz. and Del.
means ‘whose life is deemed of
little or no value’—the opposite
of Ps. Ixxii. 146 (Obs. the
commentators grouped together
above do not always agree in their
exegesis. Thus Knobel, while
rendering as Gesenius, gives an ex-
position akin to my own, ‘ despised
of men, who despise him in the
soul, i.e., heartily.’ Vitringa, too,
though he translates as Ewald,
explains substantially as I have
done, ‘Contempto fastiditoque a
cujusque desiderio; quem nemo
concupiscit ; quo nemo delectatur ;
qui cuique fastidioest.’ Calvin, how-
ever, with the same version as Vitr.
and Ew., gives a very different in-
terpretation, ‘Hoc autem miseriam
populi auget,’ he says (taking the
promise to be addressed to the
people), ‘quod “in anima” apud
seipsum contemptibilem esse dicit.’)
—The people] Hebr. géy (no
article). The term is here used in
its widest and primary meaning, ‘a
collection of people,’ viz. all those
with whom the Servant has to do,
not merely Jews, and not merely
Gentiles, but all mankind. Comp.
the use of the synonym (a) in xl. 7,
xlii. 5, Num. xxi. 6, Ps, xviii. 28
(26), xxii. 7 (6), and perhaps Ixii. 9
(8); also the phrase ‘righteous
people’ (dy caddig), Gen. xx. 4.—
The rendering ‘peoples’ may be
supported by Job xvii. 6, where
Job, the typical righteous man,
complains that he is become ‘a

CHAP. XLIX.] ISATAII. 15

princes—they shall bow down ; because of Jehovah, in that
he is faithful, and of the Holy One of Israel, in that he chose
thee. ®Thus saith Jehovah, In the season of favoar do I
answer thee, and in the day of salvation I help thee; and I
‘keep thee and appoint thee for a covenant of the people, to
raise up the land, to assign the desolate heritages, ° saying to
the bondsmen, Go forth, and to those who are in darkness,

Show yourselves.
f Form, Ew., Del.

byword of peoples’ (plural, zo¢ col-
lective). The sense is of course
the same, but the rend. adopted is
simpler. Of rulers ...] Or,
paraphrastically, ‘of despots’ (comp.
xiv. 5), for the context shows that
stern, irresponsible heathen lords
are here intended. Obs. the skilful
transition. He whom Jehovah has
honoured with the title of ‘ Servant’
and the authority of a vicegerent
becomes the slave of Jehovah’s
enemies. Yet these very kings
shall have to do obeisance to him
whom they once ‘heartily despised’
(comp. Ps. Ixxii. 11, and see on lii.
1S).——Because of Jehovah... ]
These acts of reverenceand homage
are ultimately offered to Jehovah. It
is Jehovah’s promise and Jehovah’s
election which have been verified
by his Servant’s glorification.

8 Thus saith Jehovah ... ]
The prophecy takes up the thread
which has been dvopped in wv. 7.
The new revelation refers to the
mediatorial position of the Servant
and his spiritual activity. In the
fulness of time, when the ‘ season’
has arrived for proving to the world
the truth of the declaration in xiii.
I (instead of ‘favour’ we might
render ‘good pleasure’), the Ser-
vant of Jehovah shall himself be
‘helped,’ or ‘saved, and, like the
sufferer in Ps. xxii. (vv. 23-27), be-
come the source of help and salva-
tion to others—— answer thee]
The tense is the prophetic perfect.
—-AndI... the people] Re-
peated verbally from xlii 6 (see
notes). The person addressed is
obviously the same, and is distinct,

They shall pasture & on the ways, and on

® In all, Sept., Ew.

in some sense, from the people of
Israel —distinct even from the‘ spi-
ritual Israel’? which is to take the
place of the unpurified race of the
past. To raise up the lana]
Comp. v. 19 ‘thy broken-down
(or, ruined) land, To assign]
viz. to the families to which the
respective possessions belonged.
Clearly this function belongs to a
historical person, such as Joshua
was in the past, and Zerubbabel was
destined to be in the future. Here,
as elsewhere, in his picture of the
‘Messianic’ future, the prophet com-
bines events which the reality of
history spreads over long stretches
of time.

® Obs. it is not the word of Cyrus
(as in xliv. 28), but that of Jehovah
through his Servant, which is the
efficient cause of deliverance.
To the bondsmen] The ‘bonds-
men’ are the Jews, or, more pro-
perly, the Israelites (from whichever
section of the nation). Contrast
xlii. 7 (see note). This portion ot
the prophecy (vv. 7-12) belongs
specially to Israel: notice the sig-
nificant omission in v. 8 of the
words ‘a light of the nations’
(found in xlii. 6). Shall pasture
on the ways] Here follows a
digression suggested, by the men-
tion of deliverance. (Obs. the de-
liverance is taken for granted ; the
Divine word ‘Go forth’ has a self-
fulfilling power.) The digression
describes not merely the comfort
of the return-journey (though this
is not excluded), but also the bliss-
ful condition of the restored exiles
(comp. on xl. 11). The laiter are

16 ISATAH. [CHAP. XLIX.

all bare hills there is pasture for them: '°they shall not
hunger nor thirst, the "mirage and the sun shall not smite
them, for he that hath compassion upon them shall lead them,
and unto springs of water shall he guide them. " And I will
make all my mountains a road, and my highways shall be
exalted. |? Behold, these come from afar; and behold, these
from the north and from the ‘south, and these from the land

of Sinim.

3 Ring out, O heavens, and exult, O earth, and

h Glowing heat, Lowth, Ges. (with the ancients).—But see xxxv. 7.

{ West, Hebr. text.

compared to a well-tended flock,
which has no temptation to scatter,
as it finds pasture ‘on the ways’
(i.e., whichever way the sheep turn),
and even on the ‘bare hills’ of the
wilderness (comp. xli. 18, Jer. xii.
12).

10 The literal journey homeward,

and the metaphorical journey of life,
shall both be made easy to them.
The misery of intense heat, and
the phenomenon of the deluding
mirage (see on xxxv. 7) which so
often accompanies it, will be equally
unknown in ‘the coming age.’
Neither the szvage, nor the sun,
shall smite them. Comp the pa-
rallel passage, Ps. cxxi. 6 (where,
however, the zeugmatic use of the
verb is not absolutely neces-
sary).
11-12 The prophet is always ho-
vering between the near and the
distant future. But as these two
verses clearly show, his conception
even of the near future is modified
by his vision of what is really far
off. He is thinking here of the re-
turn of the exiles, but the language
which he uses is by no means ex-
hausted by the return of the Jews
from Babylon, though this event
was all that a Jew of ordinary fore-
sight living at the close of the Exile
could anticipate.

11 Wry mountains] Not merely
the mountains of Canaan (as xiv.
25), but those of the whole earth ;
jt is an assertion of Jehovah’s uni-
versal lordship. My highways]
See on xl. 4.

1% The return of

the exiles.

Comp. xliii. 5, 6 (with note), where,
however, the quarters are given in
a different order. Jerusalem seems
to be here regarded as the centre
of the world (as Ezek. v. 5).——
Come from far] The vagueness
of this term, ‘from far,’ suggests
that the writer did not origin-
ally intend a catalogue of the four
quarters of the world. Taken in
connection, however, with what fol-
low, the ‘far’ region should be the
west, which is favoured also by
v. Ia. From the south] This
rendering seems to be required by
the context :—‘ from the north and
from the west’ would be an unna-
tural combination. And yet ‘ the
sea,’ which the Hebr. has instead
of ‘the south,’ in definitions of
place commonly means ‘the west.’
The same difficulty occurs in Ps,
cvii. 3, where ‘the redeemed’ are
said to be gathered ‘ from the east,
and from the west, from the north,
and from the sea’ :—here ‘the sea’
clearly cannot mean ‘the west,’ be-
cause that quarter has been already
mentioned. Del. (on Ps. /.c.) thinks
“the sea’ means the Mediterranean
about Egypt, ie., the south-west,
but against the parallelism ; Hitzig
prefers the Erythrean, but against
usage. For a justification of the
rendering ‘south’ see crit. note.
—-Sinim] See appendix to this
chapter.

18. Ring out, O heavens] In
ecstatic transport, the prophet calls
upon heaven and earth to sympa-
thise. His language reminds us ot
the poetry of art, but it is really the

CHAP. XLIX.]

ISAIAH, 17

burst out, O mountains, into a ringing sound, for Jehovah
doth comfort his people, and yearneth upon his afflicted

ones,

14 And Zion said, Jehovah hath forsaken me, and the Lord

hath forgotten me!

as not to yearn upon the son of her womb?
these forget, yet will I not forget thee!

'5Can a woman forget her suckling, so

Should even
16 Behold, I have

portrayed thee upon the palms of the hands; thy walls are

soberest truth (see on xliv. 23).
Too soon, alas! he is recalled from
anticipations of the future to the
miseries of the present (or, more
correctly perhaps, from the distant
to the near future). Zion and the
Servant stand over against each
other, without having been able to
form an intimate relation. Hence
the complaint of the Servant, ‘I
have laboured in vain’ (xlix. 4),
finds a responsive echo in the words
of the personified Zion (v. 14).
Jehovah hath forsaken me| This
is not an expression of absolute
unbelief; it is the pain of seem-
ingly unreturned affection which
borrows the language of scepticism
(comp. xl. 27). The highest act of
faith is to see God with the heart
when all outward tokens of His
presence are removed. There are
vimes when even the noblest of
mankind are unequal to such an
effort ; even the ‘Servant of Jeho-
vah’ gave way to dejection for a
moment (see on xlix. 4).

1 Can a woman... | Jehovah
meets this wounded heart, not
with harsh censure, not even witha
gentle remonstrance (comp. xl. 28),
but with an assurance of uninter-
rupted affection. His loving-kind-
ness surpasses that of a father
(comp. on Ixiii. 16); it is even more
tender than that of a mother for
her suckling (comp. lxvi. 13).——
Should even these forget] For
Lady Macbeth can say—

I would, while it was smiling in my face,
Have plucked my nipple from his bone-
less gums,
And dashed the brains out.
(Afacbeth, Act I. Sc. 7.)

VOL, II.

16 ¥ have portrayed thee] Sept.
eCoypapynod oe. It is of course
implied that the portraiture is
indelible, like the sacred marks of
devotees (see on xliv. 5). With
touching condescension, Jehovah
inverts the usual order. A wor-
shipper needs a consecrating mark
to remind him at all times of his
relation to his God. Zion’s God,
though not in need of such a re-
minder, has condescended, as it
were, to ‘grave Jerusalem on the
palms of his hands’—Dr. Weir
compares Ex. xiii. 9, 16.——Thy
walls] This might mean ‘thy
ruined walls,’ but as it is the ideal
Jerusalem (see on xl. 9) which is
addressed, it seems better to take
the walls to be those ‘great and
high’ walls, which exist ideally in
the heavenly Jerusalem.—No better
commentary on this verse can be
given than a passage from the
Apocalypse of Baruch, cap. iv.
Baruch complains of the ruin which
has befallen God’s city. The Lord
replies, ‘Anne putas, quod ista sit
urbs de qua dixi: super volas ma-
nuum descripsi te? Non ista edi-
ficatio nunc edificata in medio
vestrum, illa est que revelabitur
apud me, que hic preeparata fuit ex
quo cogitavi ut facerem paradisum,
et ostendi eam Adamo priusquam
peccaret, cum vero abjecit manda-
tum, sublata est ab eo, ut etiam
paradisus . . . Etnunc ecce custo-
dita est apud me, sicut est para-
disus.” (Fritzsche, Librd apocryphi
Vet. Test., p. 655.) Seealso4 Ezra
x. 50, &c.

18 ISATAH, [CHAP. XLIX.

continually before me. '” Thy *sons make haste ; those who
laid thee in ruins, and those who wasted thee, begin to de-
part out of thee. }* Lift up thine eyes round about, and see;
they are all gathered together, and are come that they may
be thine. As I live, (it is the oracle of Jehovah,) thou shalt
surely clothe thee with them all, as with ornaments, and bind
them upon thee like a bride. 1% For thy ruined and desolate
places, and thy broken-down land—yea, thou wilt now be too
narrow for the inhabitants, and those who swallowed thee up
will be far away. *° The children of thy bereavement shall
yet say in thy ears, The place is too narrow for me; make
room for me that I may dwell. *! And thou shalt say in thy
heart, Who hath 'borne me these, seeing I was bereaved

k Builders, Sept., Targ., Vulg., Saadya, ancient Babylonian MS, (primd manu),

Lo., J.a.—Ew., combining both readings (dddy74 and déndyzk), has, Soon shall thy
children become (?) thy builders. (There may at least be a play upon words.)

! Begotten, Ges., Ew., Stier (taking the question as referring to the father).

17 Thy sons make haste...
The ideal Jerusalem is to be
brought into the region of pheno-
mena, not by descent from heaven
(as in Rev. xxi.), but by the labours
of her ‘children. First, Zion is
told, in the verbal form appro-
priated to the objective statement
of facts, that her children (comp. lx.
4), ‘haste’ (or ‘have made haste’)
i.e., run swiftly to her side ; then,
in the emotional or descriptive
tense, that her destroyers ‘ go forth’
(or ‘ begin to go forth’) from her—
as if they had been all those years
engaged on the task, never able to
sate their fury. The alternative
reading, ‘thy builders,’ produces a
good antithesis, and agrees well
with v. 19, but not with vv. 20, 21.

18 Lift up thine eyes] The
first half of the verse recurs in Ix. 4.

Thou shalt clothe thee . . |
The new inhabitants are compare
to ornaments on a dress (comp.
Zech. ix. 16), and to the state-girdle
worn by a bride over her robe
(Jer. ii. 32, where A.V. has wrongly
attire’).

19 The prophet seems to observe
gestures of incredulity. In reply,
he is far from underrating the in-
trinsic improbability of the change
(note the triple reference to the low

estate of Zion), and yet he em-
phatically maintains its certainty.
The change is to be a Divine
wonder. The desolate land of
Canaan shall have such fertility
restored to it as to support a teem-
ing population. ‘Will be far
away] The tense is the perfect of
prophetic certitude.

20 whe children of thy be-
reavement] i.e., those born while
Zion thought herself bereft of all
her children. For the figure,
comp. xlvii. 8—The new inhabi-
tants shall be heard to say, not to
Jerusalem, as Naeg. strangely, but
the one to the other, The place is
too narrow for me. It is the
complaint of an overpopulated
country. —— Make room] Lit,
‘move further off;’ the same idiom
as in Gen. xix. 9.

21 who hath borne me these?
Supposing that the new children
are applying to be adopted by her,
Zion inquires who is their real
mother (so Hitz., Del., Naeg.). Alt.
rend. is in itself improbable, and
is against the Hebrew usage (see
Gen. xvi. 1). An exile and
removed] Here the prophet falls
out of the figure. But he returns
to it directly : ‘I was left alone, i.e,
I was the sole survivor, The as-

CHAP. XLIX.] ISATAL. 19

and unfruitful, an exile and removed? and these, who hath
brought them up? Behold, I was left alone ; these, where
have they been ?

Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I will lift up
mine hand towards the nations, and set up my banner towards
the peoples, and they shall bring thy sons in the bosom, and
thy daughters shall be carried on the shoulder. *8 And kings
shall become thy foster-fathers, and their queens thy nursing-
mothers ; with their face to the earth shall they bow down
unto thee, and the dust of thy feet shall they lick ; and thou
shalt know that I am Jehovah, those that hope in whom shall

not be ashamed.

one, or the “captives of the terrible one™ escape?

24 Can the prey be taken from the mighty

2% For

m So read by Pesh., Vulg., Lowth, Ew., Knob., Weir.—Hebr. text is variously
rendered. Captives of the righteous one, Vitr., Kay; or, of him who has the right
(of possession), Stier.—Captive band of righteous ones, Hitz., Del.—Righteous cap-
tives, Naeg.—Booty (?) taken from the righteous one, Ges.

tonishment of Zion is caused by
the vast multiplication of the com-
paratively few who had gone into
exile.

22 The explanation of the mystery.
At Jehovah’s bidding, but with
hearty compliance on the part of
the Gentiles, the exiled Jews shall
be restored totheir homes. There
is evidently an allusion to xi. 11, 12.
In the bosom] The figure is
suggested by v. 21, for it was the
part of the foster-father to carry the
child in the bosom (szzzs) of his
garment, Num. xi. 12 (where the
word for ‘ bosom,’ however, is dif-
ferent).

23 why foster-fathers| ‘Comp.
Num. xi. 12, Esth. ii. 7, but espe-
cially 2 Kings x. 1, where we read
of those who brought up the seventy
sons of Ahab, which is explained
at v. 6 by the statement that the
king’s sons were with the great
men of the city who brought them
up. So in this passage Zion is
described as a sovereign with a
numerous progeny, giving out her
children to such foster-fathers, and
to nurses.” Dr. Weir.m—Their
queens] So sdaréth should be
rendered, as will be clear from
comparing 1 Kings xi. 3, with Cant.
vi. 8. Sarva¢=‘ queen’ in Assy-

rian (and Sarah, the proper name,
in Hebrew). By ‘ queens’ the pro-
phet means principal wives ——
Shall they bow down] It is the
worship due to God and to.the
Church in which God dwells;
comp. xlv. 14, Rev. iii. 94.
Lick the dust] i.e., lie down in
the dust (see Ps. lxxii. 9, and espe-
cially Mic. vil. 17), as a token of
submission.

4 But incredulous hearers put
the question, Can the tyrant be
made to disgorge his prey?
The captives of the terrible one]
‘Our present reading gives no good
sense. Vitr. explains ¢addig by
“ seevus ferox,” but it is never found
in this sense. Ges. and others
prefer [see above], but besides that
shbhi cannot well be rendered
“booty,” the mention of the right-
eousness of Israel is altogether
foreign to the scope of the passage
....» However unwilling to alter
the present text without manu-
script authority, I must agree with
those who read ‘aig instead of
¢addig. There can be no doubt it
was a very old reading. It is, be-
sides, greatly favoured by the next
verse’ (Dr. Weir). The correction
is also palzographically « natural
one. Dr. Kay (see above) takes

c2

20 ISATAH. [CHAP. XLIX.

thus saith Jehovah: Even the captives of the mighty one
shall be taken, and the prey of the terrible one shall escape,
for with him that contendeth with thee J will contend, and thy
children J will save. % And I will cause those that oppress
thee to eat their own flesh, and with their own blood, as with
new wine, shall they be drunken; and all flesh shall know
that I Jehovah am thy saviour, and that thy Goel is the Hero
of Jacob.

the ‘righteous one’ to be Jehovah, but in God? (Dr. Weir).

whose instrument Zion’s captor was.

*5 This almost incredible thing
shall indeed take place; Israel
shall_be rescued. J will con-
tend] The pronoun is very em-
phatic. What hope could Zion
have against the ezbdd0r, the ‘arig,

*° To eat their own flesh]
Comp. ‘they shall eat every one
the flesh of his own arm’ (ix. 20),
a figure for disunion to the point
of mutual hostility. The Hero
of Jacob] See on i. 24, where the
same rare word (’adfir) occurs.

Appendix on ‘ The Land of Sinim’ (Chap. xlix. v. 14).

From all the ends of the earth the scattered Israelites gather to
their home. Among the centres of their dispersion is mentioned
‘the land of Sinim (or, of the Sinim).’ Who or what is Sinim? Re-
ferring for the views of the older commentators to a famous article
by Gesenius,! and to the dictionaries of the Bible, I will simply state
what seems to me the present state of the controversy.

It is probable, though not certain (considering the vagueness of
the phrase ‘from afar’ in the first line), that the prophet intends to
describe the Israelites as flocking from the four quarters of the earth.
If so, the Sinim (for Sinim is obviously the name of a people) will
represent the remote east or west, from the point of view of Babylonia.
Hence we may at once dismiss the only people called Sinim else-
where in the Old Testament, viz. the Phoenician Sinites of Gen. x. 17,
for these (though westward of Babylonia) were too near at hand, as
well as too unimportant a tribe, to be mentioned in this connection.
The only claimants remaining (for the Pelusiotes were not a nation,
and are nowhere called Sinim) are the Chinese, who, though rejected
with scorn by Vitringa, have, since the elaborate discussion by
Gesenius, received the general adhesion of commentators, It must,
however, be candidly admitted that the reasoning of Gesenius falls
short of demonstration. His most plausible argument is based on
the Chinese name Thsin, originally belonging to a powerful family
which, from 246-206 B.c., united the various petty states of China
under their sway, and then (as is supposed) further applied by foreign

4 Thesaurus lingu. Hebr, et Chald. Vet, Test, ed. I1., tom. ii, (r84o), s. v. ‘Sinim.’

CHAP. XLIX.] ISAIAH. 21

nations to the country which this family governed. This, however,
as well as the inference which has been drawn from the similar names
of other much more ancient local dynasties, and from the Chinas of
the Sanskrit Laws of Manu and the Mahabhfarata, is now known to
be valueless (Strauss ; Richthofen), Still the case of the Chinese
is not desperate. It is historically certain from the Chinese records
that there were foreign merchants in China as early as the roth cent,
B.c., and Chinese merchants in foreign lands as early as the rath,
and it is probable that direct commercial relations existed between
China and India, and consequently at any rate direct relations
between China and Pheenicia, which will account for the presence
of porcelain-ware with Chinese characters upon it in the Egyptian
Thebes. !

This is substantially the contention of Victor von Strauss-Torney.?
Another eminent scholar, indeed, (Freiherr von Richthofen,) takes
a somewhat different view. The theory of an early intercourse be-
tween the Chinese and the peoples of Western Asia does not com-
mend itself to him as probable. If there was any such intercourse,
he says, it must have been by sea, and not by land, for the vast high-
land of Tibet, with its wild nomadic population, put an effectual
bar to all access from the west. A statement like this from such a
competent authority puts an end to the hypothesis of Movers,‘ that
Chinese silk was imported to Babylon 4y /and through Pheenician
merchants. And yet is it not conceivable that roving Phoenician
merchants may have reached China zx ther coasting voyages ? That
the Assyrians, at any rate, arrived in China by sea as far back as
2353 B.c., there is positive traditional evidence, if M. Pauthier’s
report may be trusted. In that year, he says, according to Chinese
traditions, an envoy arrived from a far country bearing a wondrous
gift. It was nothing less than ‘a divine tortoise a thousand years
old, on the back of which was an inscription in strange characters
like tadpoles, comprising the history of the world from its origin.’ A
second embassy is said to have arrived in 1110 B.c., and the historians
affirm that it took the envoys a whole year to return to their own
country from Siam by the sea-coast. This, with the fact that they
are called ‘the people of the long trailing robes’ (a description
quite unsuitable to the costumes of the tropical countries south of
China), and above all the tadpole-characters (which at once suggests
cuneiform writing), leads M. Pauthier to the conclusion, that the nation

1 Wilkinson, AZanners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, 1st series (Lond.
1837), iii. 106-109,

2 Excursus on ‘The Land of Sinim,’ in Delitzsch’s Yesaia, 2 Aufl., S. 712-715
(3 Aufl., S. 688-692).

3 Col. H. Yule’s review of Von Richthofen’s China, in Academy, xiii. 339.

4 Movers, Die Phouizier, ii. 3, Pp. 255.

22 ISAIAH. [CHAP. XLIX.

to which the envoy belonged was the Assyrian, or the Babylonian.*
It is worth noticing that the king of Assyria in 1110 would be the
warlike and enterprising Tiglath-Pileser I.

As for the name Sinim, it has been plausibly accounted for by
the frequent use of sjiz (nearly = cin), literally ‘man,’ to describe
persons according to their qualities, occupation, country, or locality.
Hearing the Chinese so often call themselves syiz, it was natural for
foreigners to call them by this name. The form Sinim is accounted
for by the absence of the soft g in Hebrew. With reference to
Gesenius’s opinion that the name uw, ¢chin, &c., spread over the
East from India, it has been pointed out to me? that, according to
Rémusat, the Chinese first entered India, not by a direct route, but
from the north-west, and were therefore actually known at any rate
te the peoples dwelling on that side of India before they were known
to the Hindus themselves.

In conclusion, I may remark that it is not necessary to assume
that Jewish exiles actually lived in China when the prophet wrote ;
enough that he knew of (or, as the case may be, foresaw) the exist-
ence of a numerous and extensive Diaspora. As a matter of fact,
however, Jewish immigrants from Persia do appear to have entered
China before the Christian era. This is generally recognised as one
result of the intercourse with the unfortunate Jews at Kai-fung-foo.*
Of the antiquity of this settlement there can be no doubt, and the
inscribed marble tablets which were till lately accessible to all comers
place the immigration at least as far back as the third century B.c.
The synagogue with its tablets has disappeared, and the ‘orphan
colony’ is in danger of passing away. Fortunately for us, we can ap-
peal both to Roman Catholic and to Protestant testimony. The early
Jesuit missionaries were the first discoverers of these Chinese Jews,
and one of them, Father Gozani, took a copy of the inscriptions in the
synagogue, which he sent to Rome. The very interesting mémoire of
the Jesuits omits to give any direct account of the inscriptions ; it
contains, however, the following statement :—

Ces Juifs disent qu’ils entrérent en Chine sous la dynastie des Han
pendant le régne de Han-ming Ti, et qu’ils venaient de Si-yu, c’est-4-dire,
du pays de ’Occident. Il parait par tout ce qu’on a pu tirer d’eux que
ce pays de l’Occident est la Perse, et qu’ils vinrent par le Corassan et
Samarcande. Ils ont encore dans leur langue plusieurs mots persans,

1 Pauthier, Relations politiques de la Chine avec les puissances occidentales (Paris,
1859), pp. 5-8. Iam indebted for this reference, which I have of course verified, to
the Rev, R. A. Armstrong, of Nottingham. M. Pauthier's authority as a critic has, I
am aware, been challenged. His interpretation of the Chinese traditions seems to me
very plausible, but is not absolutely essential to my argument.

2 Mr. Armstrong will permit me again to mention his name.

> Kai-fung-foo is the capital of Honan, the most central province of the Chinese
Empire,

CHAP. L.] ISAIAH. 23
et ils ont conservé pendant longtemps de grands rapports avec cet état.
Ils croient étre les seuls qui se soient établis dans ce vaste continent.’

Mr. Finn’s statement is in complete accordance with the Jesuit
report of the tradition of the date of the settlement. He says, ‘ Ac-
cording to the inscribed marble tablets upon the walls, there may
have been several immigrations of this people into China at different
epochs :—(1) In the Chow dynasty, between a.c. 1122 and A.c. 249 ;
(2) In the Han dynasty, between a.c. 205 and a.D. 220 ; (3) In the
LXV. cycle (a.p. 1163), when they brought a tribute of cotton cloth
to the emperor. There was also their own oral statement to the
Jesuit missionaries, referring their arrival [ie., that of the ancestors
of the then existing families] to a period shortly after the Roman
dispersion from Jerusalem.’ ?

See further Lassen, Jndische Alterthumskunde, ii. 1029; L.
Geiger, Ursprung der Sprache, p. 456; Egli, Zettschrift fiir wissen-
schaftliche Theologie, vi. 400, &c. (mainly a criticism upon Gesenius) ;
and a paper by ‘ E.B.’ (dated from Pekin), in Ausland, 1873, p. 267,
&c. (this I only know through the third edition of Delitzsch’s Jesaia ;
it comes to the purely negative result that the name Z3china is not
at all Chinese). It may be noticed here, that our form China
comes to us from the Malays, as the wise and adventurous Marco
Polo already knew (Zhe Book of Ser Marco Polo ed. Yule, Book iii,

chap. 4).

CHAPTER L.

Contents.—Israel has been self-rejected ; Jehovah, on his part, is willing
and able to redeem, though no human champion answers to his call (vv.
1-3). Then the scene changes. The Servant describes his intimate re-
lation to Jehovah, his gift of eloquence, his persecutions, and the stead-
fast faith with which he undergoes them (vv. 4-9). The chapter closes
with a solemn contrast and warning (vv. 10, II).

1Thus saith Jehovah, Where is your mother’s bill of
divorce with which I put her away? or which of my creditors

1-8 Vitringa and Ewald regard
these verses as an integral part of
the discourse contained in chap. xlix.
As long as we confine our view to
v. 1, this theory of theirs seems
highly plausible, for v. 1 certainly
looks like a second reply on the

part of Jehovah to the complaint
of Zion in xlix. 14. On the other
hand, it should be observed (1)
that chap. xlix falls into two equal
parts, and that the conclusion of
the second of these is, from its
solemnity, perfectly adequate as a

1 «Mémoire sur les Juifs établis en Chine,’ in Le¢tres édisiantes et curieuses, écrites
des missions étrangéres, tom, xxiv. (Toulouse, 1811), pp. 50, SI.
2 Finn, The Orphan Colony of Fews in China (Lond, 1872), pp. 6, 7

24

is it to whom I sold you?

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. L.

Behold, for your iniquities were

ye sold, and for your rebellions was your mother put away.
? Wherefore, now that I am come, is there no man? now that

I have called, is there none that answereth?
short to deliver ? or have I no power to rescue ?

close to the entire prophecy, and
(2) that wv. 2 and 3 are very dif-
ferent in tone and purport from
all that precedes. Is it not the
more probable view that vw. 1 con-
tains a thought suggested by xlix.
14, subsequently to the final redac-
tion of the prophecy? Not being
able to work it into chap. xlix.,
the prophet seems to have allowed
himself to give it a new develop-
ment (in vv. 2, 3) which would
have been unsuitable to the
original prophecy.—Obs. the Di-
vine speaker here addresses the
children of Zion ; in xlix. 14-26, he
confined himself to Zion the mo-
ther. ‘Where is your mother's
bill of divorce... In Jere-
miah (iii. 8) it is said of the ‘ back-
sliding’ kingdom of Samaria that
Jehovah ‘put her away, and gave
her a bill of divorce,’ though a hope
is still held out of her ultimate re-
storation. Judah, however, may be
still more easily restored to her
full privileges, for—‘ where is her
bill of divorce?’ There is none;
Jehovah in His mercy omitted this
formality ; consequently her dis-
missal has not the legal value of
a divorce. Obs. marriage is here
a figure of the mystic relation be-
tween the Deity and his worship-
pers (see Hos. il. and my notes on
1. 21, xliv. 11). ‘Which of my
creditors . . Another figure
condescendingly borrowed from the
experience of human life. From
2 Kings iv. 1, Neh. v. 5, it appeais
that Hebrew parents, when hope-
lessly in debt, were accustomed
to sell their children to their cre-
ditors. Such an unqualified sur-
render of a man’s flesh and blood
is not expressly sanctioned in the
Law (not even in Ex. xxi. 7), but
it was a custom too strong to be
eradicated, Jehovah admits fro

Is my hand too
Behold, by

Jormé that He may have creditors,
but denies that, in pursuance of
this old custom, He has sold the
Jews to any of them :—conse-
quently there is none but a moral
bartotheir restoration to His favour
Comp. lii. 3, ‘Ye were sold for
nought, and ye shall not be re-
deemed with money.’ For your
iniquities were ye sold...
Israel, then, (represented by Judah,)
has really been ‘sold, has really
been ‘put away.’ But this is not
by Jehovah’s will ; the cause lies in
Israel himself. It was a necessary
punishment for Israel’s sins, but
only a temporary one, thanks to
the ‘unfailing loving-kindnesses of
David’ (lv. 3).

* Most commentators take the
first part of this verse as mention-
ing some of the sins which had
led to Israel’s temporary rejection.
But it rather expresses Jehovah’s
painful surprise that he is not
seconded by any human cham-
pion. —-Now that I am come
viz., with a call to repentance an
an offer of deliverance. In what
way, it may be asked, can Jehovah
be said to have come? The Tar-
gum gives an answer, which has
been largely adopted, by inserting
the explanatory words ‘in the
prophets.’ This view is not in it-
self inadmissible (comp. Ixv. 1, 2,
Jer. xi. 7), but is very unsuitable to
the context. For the same person
who has ‘come,’ and who has
‘called, goes on to declare that he
can dry up the sea and clothe the
heavens in mourning :—surely then
he can be none other than Jehovah
in all the plenitude of his per-
sonality. Obs. it is Jehovah im-
mediately who ‘comes,’ not as re-
presented by his Servant (Del.
Naeg.). The passage is precisely
parallel to lix. 16 (comp. Ixiii. 3, 5),

CHAP. L.]

ISAIAH. 25

my rebuke I can dry up the sea, I can make the rivers a
wilderness, their fish stinking for lack of water and dying for
thirst; ?I can clothe the heavens in mourning, and make

sackcloth their covering.

4The Lord Jehovah hath given me the tongue of dis-
ciples, that I may *edify the weary by a word: he wakeneth
morning by morning, wakeneth to me an ear to hearken as

= So Klostermann (see crit. note).—TEXT, know how to sustain (?), (Aquila,
Vulg., Ges , Del., Naeg., Weir), or, moisten (?), ie., bedew, refresh (Ew., Knob.).

where Jehovah is represented as
wondering that there was no one
morally qualified to be the national
champion, and as throwing himself
unassisted into the breach on be-
half of his people. The rendering
‘IT have come’ is preferable to ‘1
came,’ because the interposition of
Jehovah is still future, orat any rate
incomplete. Behold] The usual
word for introducing the descrip-
tion of a Divine judgment. By
my rebuke] ‘Rebuke’ is the
term for the opposite of the crea-
tive word. Instead of calling into
existence, it sends into non-exist-
ence, or at least confines within
bounds (see xvii. 13, li. 20, Ixvi. 15,
Nah. i. 4, Ps. ix. 5, xviii. 15, civ. 7,
cvi. 9, Matt. viii. 26, Luke iv. 39).
I can dry up the sea] Some,
e.g., Calv., Kay (rendering in the
present tense, ‘I dry up’), see in
this and in the next verse a direct
reference to miracles like the di-
viding of the Red Sea and the
Jordan, the changing of the Nile-
water into blood, and the darken-
ing of the heavens (Ex. x. 21). As,
however, we find similar phrases
elsewhere in descriptions of Divine
interpositions (see Ps. xviii. 15,
Nah. i. 4, Hab. iii. 8, 11, Isa. xiii.
10), it is allowable to interpret
these two verses symbolically. A
secondary reference to the ancient
miracles may of course reasonably
be admitted, God’s wonders in the
past being regarded by the pro-
phets as typical (see x. 26, xi. 16,
xlili. 16, 17)——The rivers a
wilderness] Imitated in Ps.
cvil. 33.

3 Sackcloth

their covering]

Comp. Rev. vi. 12, ‘the sun became
black as sackcloth of hair’ (the
dress of mourners, Joel i. 8, &c.).

4 A fresh prophecy, chiefly in
the form of a soliloquy. Its con-
tents remind us of xlii. 1-4, xlix.
1-9 (see especially xlix. 2, 7), except
that there is no reference here to
the evangelisation of the heathen.
If the subject of those two pro-
phecies is the Servant of Jehovah,
it follows of necessity that the same
personage is the speaker here. It
would be strange indeed to suppose
that the prophet is the speaker,
‘blown in as it were by a snow-
storm’ (Hengstenberg). The sec-
tion would then stand quite soli-
tary, without connection either with
the preceding or the following dis-
courses. (Ewald, however, thinks
that Israel is the speaker; Sei-
necke, the pious kernel of the
nation ; Gesenius, Hitzig, Knobel,
the prophet.) The Lord Je-
hovah] Notice the solemnity of
the introduction ; the same double
name (Adonai Yahveh) occurs three
times afterwards (vv. 5, 7, 9).
The tongue of disciples] i.e.,
a facility like that of well-trained
scholars (see viii. 16, liv. 13), full of
their morning lesson, or, as Luther
(ap. Naeg.) puts it, ‘lingua discipu-
lata, quz nihil loquitur, nisi quod a
Deo didicit.’. From the occurrence
of the plural (‘disciples’) Seinecke
draws an argument in favour of his
view mentioned above; he com-
pares Job xix. 11, ‘He accounteth
me as His enemies’ (Job, according
to Seinecke, being also a collective
personification). It seems to me
a sufficient reply that the picture

26

ISAIAH,

[CHAP. L,

disciples, >The Lord Jehovah hath opened to me an ear, and

I have not been defiant ; I have not turned back.

® My back

I have given to smiters, and my cheeks to those who plucked
out the hair; my face I have not hidden from confusion and

which the prophet here gives us is
that of a class of disciples, all with
‘wakened ears,’ and swift to re-
produce their master’s instruction,
while in Job the hostility of God
appears to the sufferer in his illu-
sion great enough to be expended
on a whole company of his ene-
mies. The weary] A com-
parison of lvii. 15 shows that here,
as in Matt. xi. 28,it is an inward and
spiritual aswellasoutwardand phy-
sical weariness which is intended.
He wakeneth morning by
morning] The Servant does not
receive revelations like ordinary
prophets in ecstatic moments, in
dreams and visions of the night,
but in his waking hours, and not
only so, but every morning—the
spirit of prophecy abides constantly
upon him (Del., Naeg.). The mes-
sage is the same—peace and resto-
ration, but it needs daily varying
to meet daily needs. It is hardly
necessary to point out the exquisite
felicity of phrase in this verse.
There are indeed similar expres-
sions elsewhere (see 1 Sam. ix. I5,
xx. 2, Job xxxiii. 16), but not equally
poetical. An ear] It is of
course the inner ear which is meant,
as in xlviii. 8. Comp. 1 Kings iil.
12 ‘a hearing heart.’

5 Hath opened to me an ear]
The supposed reference to Ex, xxi.
5, 6, Deut. xv. 16, 17, has been de-
servedly set aside by recent com-
mentators. It is obviously a par-
ticular counmand which is referred
to. The piercing of a slave’s ears
made all commands binding for the
rest of his life ; ‘defiance’ was ex-
cluded ; moral conflict was out of
the question. Besides, the mean-
ing of the phrase ‘to open the ear’
is determined by v. 4 (comp. xlviii.
8, xlii. 18, 19). The Servant was
not a mechanical organ of revcla-
tion, but had a spiritual sympathy

with it, even when it told of suffer-
ing for himself.——/ have not
been defiant] I, weak and suscep-
tible to pain and reproach as I am,
have not stiffened my back in op-
position to duty. (The root-mean-
Ing is s¢/vzzgere.) The declaration
thus ascribed to the Servant is deci-
sive against the ‘collective’ theory.
It was the offence of Jonah, a type
or symbol of Israel, that he pursued
the very opposite line of conduct
to that which is here described.
Few even in the class of prophets
could take up the words of the
Servant. Jeremiah indeed does
utter a like statement, but, both in
his sufferings and in his deportment,
Jeremiah was a striking type of the
Servant of Jehovah. ‘As for me,
he says, ‘I have not withdrawn from
following lovingly after thee’ (Jer
xvii. 6). So, too, the Servant can
declare, ‘7 have not been defiant,
I have not turned back.’ In both
cases, the words are only appro-
priate in the mouth ofan individual.
®° wy back I have given...

He has patiently, willingly endured
humiliation and scorn. So the type
Jeremiah, ‘I have been in derision
continually, everyone mocking me’
(Jer. xx. 7). So the pious sufferer,
also (to say the least) a type, in
Ps. xxii. 7, ‘All they that see me
laugh to scorn.’ So the typical
righteous man in the Book of Job
(xxx. 10), ‘They abhor me, they
flee far from me, and withhold
not spittle from my face.’ To
those who plucked out the hair]
Comp. Neh. xiii. 25, ‘And I cursed
them. . and plucked the hair
off them.’ Of all such expressions
in this section, as even Vitringa
candidly admits, the primary sense
not only may be, but must be, figu-
rative, since there is no one in the
rcligious history of Israel to whom
they can be literally applied.

CHAP. L.J ISAIAH. 27

spitting. 7 But the Lord Jehovah will help me ; therefore am
I not confounded ; therefore have I made my face as flint,
and I know that I shall not be ashamed. *Near is he that
justifieth me; who will contend with me? let us stand forth
together. Who is mine adversary ? let him come near unto
me. ° Behold, the Lord Jehovah will help me; who is he
that can condemn me? behold, they shall all fall to pieces
like a garment ; the moth shall eat them. ' Who is there
among you that feareth Jehovah, that hearkeneth to the voice
of his servant? He that walketh in darkness, and hath no
light, let him trust in the Name of Jehovah, and rely upon
his God. " Behold, all ye that kindite a fire and ’ gird your-
self with® “brands; begone into the flame of your fire, and

b Set a light to, Pesh., Secker, Hitz., Ew. (one letter different).

© Sparks, Kimchi, Calv., Hengst., Hahn, Weir.

7 ‘Against the crowd of mockcrs
he places Adonai Jehovah’ (Dr.
Weir). As flint} The same
figure is applied in a bad sense,
Jer. v. 3, Zech. vii. 12 ; in a good,
Ezek. ili. 9.——I shall not be
ashamed] i.e., not disappointed
(see on liv. 4).

8 He that justifieth me] ‘To
justify’ in the O. T. almost always
(see on liii. 11) means to pronounce
a man righteous, or to prove him so
in act :—Job xxvii. 5 is not funda-
mentally an exception. The Servant
of Jehovah speaks of the final stage
of his career in figurative language
as a trial, in which God is the
judge. This is a fresh point in
which he resembles Job. But
whereas Job, the type of a vzghte-
ous man, shrinks in terror from the
issue, the Servant, human and yet
superhuman in nature, has no doubt
as to a favourable result.

10,11 A short speech, addressed
first to those who fear and obey
Jehovah, and then to those who
resist his will. It is not quite clear
what is the meaning of the words
his servant. In xliv. 26, they are
a designation of the prophetic
writer himself, and they may per-
haps be so here. This view, it is
true, isolates vv. 10, 11 from the
rest of the chapter, but there is

nothing in these verses directly
referring to the preceding para-
graph. There are some very
abrupt transitions in the prophecy
before us, and this may be one of
them. Otherwise we may under-
stand ‘his servant’ to mean the
servant of Jehovah specially so
called. I incline to the former
theory. The speech of the Servant
in vv. 4-9 is, I think, a pure soli-
loquy, and belongs not to the
present but to the future—it is
given here by anticipation ; vv. Io,
11, on the other hand, are addressed
to the Jews living in Babylon at
the close of the Exile. V. 10 is
spoken by the prophet (so Ibn Ezra),
who, however, soon loses himself
(see v. 11) in his Divine master.
——The name of Jehovah] No
mere synonym for ‘the Divine cha-
racter, but a symbolic expression
for a special aspect, not to say
‘Person’ of the Godhead; see on
XXX. 27.

1 all ye that kindle a fire]
The meaning of this figure is un-
certain. I follow Hitz., Ew., Knob.,
Del., Naeg. in taking the ‘fire’ to
represent either the rage of unre-
strained passion (comp. ix. 18), or
the destruction which the enemies
of Jehovah prepare for his servants.
Others (as Vitr., Lowth, Ges.) re-

28 ISAIAH.

[CHAP. LI,

into the brands that ye have kindled. From mine hand this
befalleth you ; in torment shall ye lie down.

gard it as a figurative expression
for rebellion against the oppressors
of the Jews. Others again (as Calv.,
Hahn, Birks, Weir) suppose it to
be a domestic fire (xlvii. 14) which
is meant, and take this to be a
figure for all merely human com-
forts and supports, corresponding to
the figure of darkness for distress
and perplexity inv. 10. The last-
mentioned view has buta precarious
existence, as it depends on the
dubious rendering ‘sparks’; the
second strikes me as too narrow
for the wide symbolism of pro-
phecy. The first producesa striking
and natural antithesis (comp. xlii.
16, 17). ‘With brands] i.e., with
‘fiery darts’ (Eph. vi. 16, Ps. vii.

arm (see on xlv. 5). So ‘ facibus
pubes accingitur, Virg. Be-
gone into the flame] The destruc-
tion they have prepared for others
shall overtake themselves——From
mine hand] Jehovah is evidently
the speaker. In torment shall
ye lie down] An awful picture,
the more impressive for its vague-
ness. To ‘lie down’ is not a phrase
for dying (as A. E. takes it), but
suggests the fate of the guilty souls
in the underworld. ‘To lie down’
is often used of the rest of the
grave (e.g., 1 Kings ii. 10, and Inscr.
of Eshmunazar, |. 8). But the grave
and the underworld are closely al-
lied conceptions, and the tortures of
the soul in Hades are ascribed in

13). The deadly machinations of Ixvi. 24 (see note) to the dead body
the enemy are meant. ‘Gird’= _ on earth.
CHAPTER LI.

Contents.—Instruction for the spiritual Israel (vv. 1-8) ; appeal to the
self-revealing might of Jehovah (vv. 9-11) ; Divine expostulation with
Israel for his unbelief (vv. 12-15); address of Jehovah to the Servant
(v. 16); encouragement for down-trodden Jerusalem, mingled with a
pathetic picture of her troubles (vv. 17-23).

'Hearken unto me, ye that pursue righteousness, that
seek Jehovah; look unto the rock whence ye have been
hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye have been dug.
2 Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare

1 wearken unto me... ] The
prophet is drawing nearer and
nearer to the great central revela-
tion (chap. liii.), and summons to his
side the spiritual Israel, for whom
alone, as he has expressly said (see
xviii. 22), the future blessedness is
reserved, Righteousness] It
is of course ‘righteousness’ in the
objective sense of which he speaks
—a way of life in accordance with
the Divine commands, i.e., ‘ righte-
ous dealing’ (Rodwell). Look
unto the rock... | Unlikely as
the fulfilment of such ‘ exceeding

great and precious promises’ may
seem, it is not more unlikely than
the original wonder of a great
nation being descended ‘from one
man, and him as good as dead’
(Heb. xi. 12). The figure of the
‘rock,’ thus explained, is natural
enough, without supposing a sur-
vival of a myth like that of
Pyrrha.

? By himself] Lit., ‘(as) one’
There are two remarkable verbal
parallels in Ezek. xxxiii. 24 and
Mal. ii, 15. The latter indeed
seems to me only a verbal one,

CHAP. LI.] ISAIAH. 20°

you, for by himself I called him, and I blessed him, and in-
creased him. * For Jehovah doth comfort Zion, doth comfort
all her ruined places, and maketh her wilderness as Eden,
and her desert as the garden of Jehovah ; joy and gladness
shall be found therein, thanksgiving and the sound of melody.
4 Listen unto me, *my people, and ’my nation,” give ear
unto me; for instruction shall go forth from me, and my law
will I fix for the light of the peoples. * Near is my righteous-
ness ; gone forth is my salvation ; and mine arms shall judge
the peoples ; for me the countries shall wait, and upon mine

® Ye peoples, very few MSS.. Pesh., Lowth, Ges.

> Ye nations, few Hebr. MSS., Pesh., Lowth, Ges.

but the former suggests one pos-
sible object of the prophet in
adopting this form of words. It
runs thus, ‘Son of man, they that
inhabit those ruined places on the
soil of Israel say, Abraham was one,
and he became possessor of the
land: but we are many, the land
hath been given to us for a posses-
sion’; ie, ‘if Abraham received
the promise of Canaan, when he
was but one, and when there were
great nations already in possession,
how much more shall we, who are
many, and who are living on the
land of our forefathers, retain a
permanent and growing hold upon
it!’ No, the prophet replies ; the
true lesson of the solitariness of
Abraham is different. The few
genuine believers, who seek to do
the will of God, are the represen-
tatives of Abraham, and the fresh
starting-point for the promise.
I blessed him, and increased
him] The two principal features
of the promises to Abraham (Gen.
xii. 2, 3, xxii. 17 &c.).

8 Doth comfort] Lit. ‘hath
comforted. The perfect expresses
the self-fulfilling power of the Di-
vine word. As Eden... as
the garden ot Jehovah] The
occurrence of these phrases is
worth noticing, as it supplies a
subsidiary argument in contro-
versies as to the date of certain
books. ‘The garden of Jehovah’
occurs only here and in Gen. xiii.
10; ‘the garden of Elohim’ (an-

(Sept. has, Ye kings.)

other synonym for ‘the garden of
Eden’) in Ezek. xxviii. 13, xxxi.
8,9. The garden of Eden itself is
mentioned Gen. ii. 15, ii. 23, 24,
Ezek. xxxvi. 35, Joel ii. 3; ‘the
trees of Eden,’ Ezek. xxxi. 9, 16, 18.

4 Listen unto me... Not
‘listen unto the instruction which
proceeds from me’; this would be
opposed to v. 7a. The prophet
mentions a second attraction for
Jehovah’s true people. It is ‘too
light a thing’ tea 6) that Zion’s
wilderness shall be transformed ;
Jehovah, enthroned anew in Israel,
shall send forth his light and his
truth among the distant nations
(comp. ii. 2). In xlii. 1-4 this
function is ascribed to the personal
Servant, in and by whom Jehovah
works.

5 My righteousness] There is
no occasion to paraphrase this into
‘my grace’ (Hitz.), or ‘my salva-
tion’ (Ges.). Both expressions say
too little. Jehovah’s ‘righteous-
ness’ means his consistent ad-
herence to his revealed line of
action, which involves deliverance
to faithful or at least repentant
Israel, and destruction to those who
thwart his all-wise purposes. ‘Mine
arms shall judge the peoples’ ex-
presses, or at least includes, the
darker side of Jehovah’s righteous-
ness.——Shall wait] Not ‘wait’
as Knobel ; as if the judgment was
simply to fall upon Babylon, and
the oppressed nations were already
longing for its coming. The pro-

ISAIATI, [CHAP. LI.

30
arm shall they trust. ® Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and
look upon the earth beneath ; for the heavens shall vanish like
smoke, and the earth shall fall to pieces like a garment, and
the dwellers therein shall die ‘like gnats®; but my salvation
shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be annulled.
7 Hearken unto me, ye who know righteousness, the people
in whose heart is my instruction ; fear ye not frail man’s re-
proach, and at their revilings be ye not dismayed. *For as
a garment shall the moth eat them, and as wool shall the
worm eat them ; but my righteousness shall be for ever, and
my salvation to successive generations.

° Awake, awake, put on strength, O Arm of Jehovah;
awake, as in the days of antiquity, the generations of old.
Art thou not it that hewed Rahab in pieces, that pierced

© So Weir.—A gnat (i.e., gnats, Ges., &c.), De Dieu, Vitr., Lo.. Ges. Hitz., Ew.
(see crit. note).—Even so, Versions and Rabbis, Kay, Naeg.—Thus (with a gesture of

contempt), Del.

phet has forgotten Cyrus and
Babylon, and is absorbed by the
thought of the Messianic age.——
Mine arm] i.e., my help, my pro-
tection (comp. Xxxiil. 2).

6 Theheavens... like agar-
ment] The same figure as in Ps.
cii. 26. Elsewhere the order of the
world is described as everlasting
(Gen. viii. 21, 22, ix. 9-11, xlix. 26,
Ps. cxlvili. 6). Like gnats]
Like the mosquitos of the Euphra-
tes and the Nile (but the word is
applicable to insects both with and
without wings). A simile which
appears ignoble to us, but did not
so appear to the more simple-
minded Semites. So, in the first
of the Babylonian ‘Izdubar’ legends
(in the Assyrian version), we hear
of the gods of Uruk (Erech), during
a siege of that city, being over-
powered with fear, and turning
themselves into flies (Zvans. Soc.
Bibl. Arch. iv. 268) ; and the koran
declares (Sura xiii. 24), ‘ Verily God
is not ashamed to set forth as well
the instance of a gnat as of any
nobler object.’ Del.’s explanation
(comp., besides the passages
quoted by him, Am. iv. 12, Jer. v.
13) is in keeping with the usages
of Eastern conversation, but is less

suitable in a passage not designed
for oral delivery. Besides, as De
Dieu long ago pointed out, we de-
siderate a third simile to correspond
to the smoke and the garment.
Del.’s philological difficulty is obvi-
ated by Dr. Weir.

® A fresh turn in the discourse.
Awake, awake] Who utters
this splendid apostrophe !—Most
commentators reply, Zion, or the
prophet in Zion’s name. There
are two objections to this: (1)
Wherever Zion or the Church is
represented as uttering a cry, it is
in the tone of complaint (see xlix.
14, xiii. 11, &c., Ixiv. 1), whereas
this explanation is in the language
of the boldest faith ; and (2)in wv. 17,
Jerusalem (which is here synony-
mous with Zion, see lii. 1) is re-
presented as asleep. Two better
theories areopentous. Looking at
v. 9g alone, and comparing it with
hi. 1, it seems natural to regard it,
with Ges., as an exhortation of Je-
hovah to himself (comp. Judg. v. 12,
‘Awake, awake, Deborah’), or, if we
object to a rhetorical formula in so
solemn a passage, as a fragment of
a deliberation within the plurality
of the Godhead (comp. Gen. i. 26,
xi. 7). The latter is the form given

CHAP. LI]

through the dragon ?

ISAIAH. ai

1 Art thou not it that dried up the

sea, the waters of the great flood, that made the depths of the

sea a way for the released to pass over?

n[4 And the freed

ones of Jehovah shall return and come to Zion with a ringing

sound, and everlasting joy shall be upon their head ;

they

shall overtake gladness and joy, sorrow and sighing shall flee

away.*]

4 Omitted by Ew.

to the theory by Prof. Birks, who
supposes God the Son to be plead-
ing with God the Father for the
renewal of His mighty works. This,
however, is not only expressed in
too theological a way, but is con-
trary to the analogy of Scripture ;
it is God the Son (if I may follow
Prof. Birks on theological ground),
and not God the Father, who cor-
responds to the Arm (as also to the
Name and to the Face) of Jehovah,
but a glance at vv. 94, 10, suggests
another theoryin preference. The
solemn appeal which we there find
to God’s wonders of old time is
certainly more appropriate to one
who is not a Divine being ; in lxiii.
II avery similar form of words is
put into the mouth of the people.
Vitringa assigns the apostrophe to
a chorus of doctors (prophets?) and
Saints, ‘ccetui doctorum sive choro
sanctorum illustrium, ardentium
zelo divinze glorize et salutis ec-
clesie.’ I should almost prefer
regarding it as a specimen of the
intercession of the angels called,
in lxii, 6, Jehovah’s ‘remem-
brancers.’ The interest of the celes-
tial beings in the fortunes of Zion
has been already repeatedly mani-
fested (see on xl. 3)———O Arm
of Jehovah] See on xl. Io.
That hewed Rahab in pieces

] Comp. Ps. Ixxxix. 10, ‘ Thou
hast broken Rahab in pieces as one
that is slain; thou hast scattered
thine enemies with thy strong arm.’
In both these passages, the exegeti-

1 Tylor, Primitive Culture, i. 299.

(See below.)

cal tradition from the Targum on-
wards has taken Rahab (with which
the ‘dragon’ of the parallel line here
is clearly synonymous) as a sym-
bolic expression for Egypt. It has
been pointed out (in note on xxvii. 1)
that the phrase has a substratum
in mythology. The great enemy of
Jehovah’s people on earth was de-
scribed in expressions coined origi-
nally for the constantly recurring
‘war in heaven’ between the powers
of light and darkness. In confir-
mation of this, see chap. xv. of the
Egyptian Book of the Dead (Birch’s
transl. in Bunsen’s Zvy#z, vol. vi.),
where the sun-god Ra is addressed
thus:

‘ Hail ! thou who hast cut in pieces the
Scorner and strangled the Apophis’ (i.e.,
the evil serpent).

This suggests the possibility that
in the passage before us the prophet
alludes not only to the fate of the
earthly but to that of the heavenly
Rahab (see on xxvii. 1). The strife
between light and darkness, sun-
shine and storm, is always recom-
mencing ; in mythic language the
sky-dragon, though killed, returns
tolife.’ The Hebrew is not opposed
to such a reference; it may equally
well be rendered ‘that heweth,’
‘that pierceth’ (comp. on xliii. 16),
The next verse, however, shows
that if there was this reference, it
lay quite in the background of the
prophet’s mind.?

And the freed ones... ]
The verse occurs with one very

? Steinthal, in his essay on Samson, remarks, ‘It is clear how the prophet’s con-

sciousness passed imperceptibly from the myth into the legend, or, if you prefer to
call it so’ [and doubtless the prophet at least would have preferred this], ‘history.’
ee translation, appended to Goldziher’s Adythology among the Hebrews,
P. 425

32 ISAIATI.

[CHAP. LI.

T even I, am your comforter: who art thou that thou
fearest frail man that dieth, and the son of the earth-born who
is given up as grass ; and hast forgotten Jehovah thy maker,
who stretched out the heavens, and laid the foundations of
the earth, and hast been trembling continually all the day for
the fury of the oppressor, according as he hath taken aim to

destroy ? and where is the fury of the oppressor ?

14 He that

was bent down is quickly released ; he shall not die unto the
pit, neither shall his bread fail,’ seeing that I Jehovah am

slight variation in xxxv. to. Here
it is clearly not original. Either it
is a quotation by the author, or an
interpolation from the margin. It
seems to have been suggested by
the closing word of v. Io in the
Hebrew, ‘the released.’ Such sug-
gestions were more congenial to a
copyist than to a prophet.

2 x, even I, am your comforter]
This is not, I venture to think, the
answer of Jehovah to the appeal in
v. 9, but a fresh starting point in
the prophecy. The fault which the
Divine speaker reprehends is unbe-
lief, whereas vv. 9, 10 shine by the
brightness of their faith.‘ Your
comforter’ alludes tov. 3. Jehovah
first of all addresses Israel in the
plural, as an aggregate of indivi-
duals (2 plur. masc.), then in the
singular as a living organism (the
fem. gender in v. 126 personifies
Zion as a matron, the masc. in
v. 13 indicates Israel as Jehovah’s
son). Who art thou... ]‘ Why
wilt thou pay more respect to the
futile menaces of man than to the
promises of thy God?’ Jehovah
chides this unbelief as disobedience,
but with what tenderness—‘ das
freundlichste Schelten der Liebe’
(Stier). Given up] viz., into the
hand of the mower, Death.

13 Thy maker] With reference
to the nation, comp. xliii. 1——Ae-
eording as he hath taken aim
. .. ] The Jews are always on the
tenter-hooks of expectation. When
the ‘aiming’ seems to fail, their
spirits rise: when it promises to
succeed, they fall; instead of which
they ought simply to ‘rest in Jeho-

‘is the lower earthly ocean.

vah,’ ‘Where is the fury...

Anticipating the sudden destruction
of Babylon. Hence in the next
verse we have the perfect of pro-
phetic certitude. It seems strange
to read of the ‘fury’ of the Baby-
lonians ; see, however, on xlvii. 6.

\ He that was bent down] i.e.,
by the weight of his fetters, or by
confinement in the stocks (Jer. xx.
2, xxix. 26). Comp. on xlii, 22. ——
Unto the pit] i.e., so as to be cast
into the pit or grave.

15 who stirreth up... is Jeho-
vah Sab4oth] The samedescription
is found in Jer. xxxi. 35.—Taking
the opening words in connection
with v. 9 and with Job xxvi. 12, 13
(see on Isa. xxvii. 1), it is tempting
to suppose a primary reference to
the upper ocean, the ‘ waters above
the expanse, which were the scene
of the contest between Jehovah and
the leviathan (or, sky-dragon). But
the mention of the ‘ roaring’ of the
sea (which does not occur in Job Zc.)
favours the ordinary view that it
Comp.
Nah. i. 4, where this, among other
signs of the theophany, is given,
that ‘he rebuketh the sea . . . and
drieth up all the rivers.’ The figure
in lvii, 20 points in the same direc-
tion. The meaning will therefore
be that He who raiseth storms,
alike in the world of nature and of
history, is able to still them, and
that His friends have no cause to
fear. The name ‘ Jehovah Sabdoth’
enforces the same lesson. _Israel’s
God has at his command all the
forces, the potencies, the ‘ hosts,’ of
heaven and earth,

CHAP. LL] ISAIAH. 33

thy God, who stirreth up the sea, so that its waves roar, whose
name is Jehovah Sabaoth—' And I put my words in thy
mouth, and in the shadow of my hand I covered thee, to plant
the heavens and lay the foundations of the earth, and to say
unto Zion, Thou art my people.

17 Wake thee up, wake thee up, arise, O Jerusalem, who
hast drunk at the hand of Jehovah the cup of his fury; the
goblet-cup of reeling hast thou drunken and wrung out.
'8 There was no guide for her of all the sons that she had
borne, and none taking hold of her hand of all the sons that

she had brought up.

1° and I put my words... ]
It is difficult to make out the con-
nection here. The preceding verses
are addressed to Zion or Israel, but
this verse can hardly be so, on ac-
count of the closing words. Look
at the passage by itself, however,
and all the difficulty vanishes. ‘1
put my words in thy mouth’ is pre-
cisely parallel to the speech of the
Servant, ‘he made my mouth as
a sharp sword’ (viz. by giving me
his own self-realising words), and
the next clause, ‘in the shadow of
my hand I covered thee,’ is even
verbally almost identical with the
Servant’s declaration, ‘in the sha-
dow of his hand he hid me’ (xlix.
2). The Servant of Jehovah, then,

must be the person ad:lressed. The-

sudden change of object is no
doubt surprising, and has to be ac-
counted for. My conjecture is that
the verse originally stood in some
other context, and that the para-
graph closed—very suitably, as it
seems to me—with v. 15. To
plant the heavens] i.e., either
‘that I may plant,’ &c. (so Jerome,
Ew., Del.). or ‘that thou mayest
plant’ (Calv., Vitr., Hengst., Naeg.).
The analogy of xlix. 8d favours the
second alternative, which is also
more suitable both to the preceding
and to the following statement,
‘I put my words into thy mouth

.. to say unto Zion,” &c. The
‘heavens’ and the ‘earth’ are the
new ones spoken of in lxv. 17, lxvi.
22; certainly not ‘the Israelitish

225

state’ (as Ges., following Ibn Ezra).
VOL, II.

‘9 Two are the things which befell thee:

The production of this new world
depends on the words of Jehovah
committed to the Servant (comp.
Jer. 1. 9, 10).—For the use of the
verb ‘to plant,’ comp. Dan. xi. 45.
The figure is that of a tent with
its stakes set firmly in the ground
(comp. xl. 22).

17 Wake thee up, wake thee up
. .. ] The prophet, or the chorus
of prophets (comp. on xl. 1), or
of angelic ‘remembrancers,’ salutes
Jerusalem with a cheering cry. In
form it is parallel to the invocation
inv. 9. With delicate thoughtful-
ness, the consolation is prefixed to
the piteous description of Jeru-
salem’s calamity (‘Wake thee. . .
hast drunken . . . hasé drained’),
The goblet-cup ... wrung
out] The combination ‘goblet-
cup’ is not a pleonasm; it vividly
represents the fulness of the mea-
sure of Jerusalem’s punishment
(comp. xl. 2). ‘ Reeling’ means the
horror and bewilderment caused by
a great catastrophe (comp. Ps. Ix. 3,
Zech. xii. 2). Note the cadence
of the two closing words in the
Hebrew. The whole passage finds
a parallel in Ezek. xxiii. 32-34,
comp. Ps. lxxv. 8 (9).

18 Notice the elegiac rhythm in
the Hebrew.

19 Pwo are the things ‘
i.e., two kimds of evils (comp. xlvii.
9), viz., desolation for the land, and
death for the people. These are
expanded into four, to express their
depth of meaning (‘and’= with—
the Vav of association, see crit. note

b

34 ISAIAH. (CHAP. Li.

who is there to condole with thee? desolation and destruc-
tion, famine and the sword: * who is there to comfort thee ¢?
20 Thy sons are in a swoon; they lie at the corners of all the
streets, like an antelope in a net, full as they are of the fury
of Jehovah, the rebuke of thy God. 7” Therefore hear now
this, thou afflicted one, and drunken, but not with wine,
2 Thus saith thy Lord Jehovah, and thy God who is the ad-
vocate of his people, Behold, I take out of thy hand the cup
of reeling ; the goblet-cup of my fury, thou shalt not drink it
again ; * and I put it into the hand of those who tormented
thee, who said to thy soul, Bow down, that we may pass over ;
and thou madest thy back as the ground, and as the street
for those that passed over.

© Sept., Pesh., Targ., Vulg., Lo., La., Gr. (see crit note).—In what guise (or,
character) shall I comfort thee? Hebr. text (?).

on vii. 1.) Or, we may explain with
Stier, ‘desolation without, and
breaking (so literally) within—hun-
ger within, and the sword without’
(comp. Ezek. vii. 15). The elegiac

against thee? Comp. Rev. vi. 16
‘the wrath of ¢he Lanzb’ (Dr. Weir).

*1 Pherefore] Here, as often
elsewhere (e.g., x. 24, xxvii. 9, Xxx.
18) the transition from threatening

passage which follows should be
compared with Lam. ii. 11-13, 19,
21 (see also Jer. xv. 5). Jerusalem is
represented as a mother, its inhabi-
tants as sons : comp. xlix. 17, 1. 1.

20 Bike an antelope in a net]
A noble though a tragic figure,
Israel, the mountain-people, is
likened to a gazelle, which all its
swiftness and grace has not saved
from the hunters snare.——The
fury of Jehovah] What hope,
when‘ Jehovah thy God’ is ‘furious’

to promise is marked by ‘therefore.’
Jehovah cannot bear to see his
people suffer any longer than is
necessary ; ‘ therefore’ he will inter-
pose to help them. Drunken, but
not with wine] So xxix. 9. See
crit. note.

23 who said to thy soul... ]
A figurative application of a real
custom (Josh. x. 24). There isa
similar but still stronger image in
Ps. cxxix. 3, ‘ploughed upon my
back.’

CHAPTER LII.

Contents.—Jerusalem can and must be redeemed (vv. 1-6) ; a dramatic
picture of the redemption itself (vv. 7-12).

(The chapter should have been ended at v. 12).

1 Awake, awake, put on thy strength, O Zion! put on
thy robes of adornment, O Jerusalem, holy city! for no more

1 awake, awake] Another
bracing summons from the Divine
representatives (see on li, 17). The

first was merely, Stand up; the
second is, Put on thy strength
and thy robes, Thy strength]

CHAP. LII.]

ISAIAH. 35

shall there come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.
? Shake thyself from the dust; arise and sit down, O Jerusalem:
* Joose thyself from the bonds of thy neck,* O captive daughter

of Zion !

and not for money shall ye be redeemed.

3 For thus saith Jehovah, For nought were ye sold,

4 For thus saith

® So Hebr. marg. and most critics. -Th2 bonds of thy neck are unloosed, Hebr.

text, Targ., Kay, Naeg.
thesis.)

Strength returns to Zion when the
Arm of Jehovah is mighty within
her (see li. 9).——Thy robes of
adornment] i.e., those which be-
long to the holy, priestly city. Dr.
Kay aptly quotes the description of
Aaron’s robes, Ex. xxviii. 2. No
more shall there come into thee
...] ‘Then shall Jerusalem be
holiness, and no strangers shall
pass through her any more’ (Joel
111.17). ‘Strangers’ here = ‘enemies,’
those who do not acknowledge Je-
hovah for their king. The throng-
ing of foreigners announced in
chap. Ix. is of quite a different kind.
—Comp. xxxv. 8, Rev. xxi. 27.

? Shake thyself . . . sit down]
A striking contrast to Babylon,
xlvii. 1.

5 It might seem as if Jehovah
willed the perpetual captivity of
his people. Not so. They may
complain that they have been ‘sold.’
Jehovah accepts the word, but so
qualifies it as to give it quite a new
meaning. ——For nought (gvraiis,
Vulg.) were ye sold] Jehovah has
received no equivalent for his pro-
perty. It is therefore not a sale,
but only a temporary transfer. Je-
hovah has accepted no other nation
as his treasure, his pecwlium (Ex.
xix. 3), his Servant, his agent in
his world-wide purposes of grace.
Your successive captivities have
been a lamentable interruption in
the progress of his work. But at
least they do not prevent him from
receiving you back to your old
place. He took nothing for you
from your so-called ‘ buyers,’ and of
his own free will he can renew your
covenant. Thus the passage is a
further development of l. 1. The
verbally parallel passage Ps. xliv.

(This form of the text would have to be put in a paren-

12 has quite a different meaning
(see Del. ad /oc.).

4 To Egypt my people... ]
This verse seems to give, though
only allusively, a historical explana-
tion of the general statement in v.
3. Israel went down to Egypt ‘to
sojourn there’ by invitation, but
the sacred right of hospitality was
basely violated (we must supply
this from the second half-verse).
Assyria oppressed him] Al-
luding not merely to the payment of
tribute (Hitz.), but to the captivities
of Israel, and the desolating inva-
sions (comp. i. 7-9, xxxvii. 30) of
Judah by Sargon and Sennacherib.
This seems the natural meaning ;
the expressions used in v. 5 make
it plain that a new captivity is there
intended. Vitr., however, thinks
‘ Assyria’ includes Babylonia and
the Syro-Macedonian kingdom, re-
ferring for the former to 2 Kings
xxiii. 29, and for the latter to Zech.
x. 11 (?). The literal interpretation
of ‘ Assyria,’ he says, renders it im-
possible to explain the next verse,
and destroys the coherence of the
paragraph with the following con-
text (see, however, on next verse).
Dr. Weir, too, is of the same
opinion, so far as Babylonia is con-
cerned, on the ground that ‘history
mentions no deliverance from As-
syria, which can be at all compared
with the deliverance from Egypt.
This statement, however, comes
into direct collision with the pro-
phecy in x. 26; and even were it
not so, the question is of oppres-
sions rather than of deliverances.
Besides, it is contrary to the custom
of this prophecy to use the name
‘Assyria’ in the comprehensive
way supposed by Dr. Weir.

D2

36 ISAIAH. (CHAP. LII.
the Lord Jehovah, To Egypt my people went down at the
first to sojourn there, and Assyria oppressed him without
cause. 5 And now what have I (to do) here? is the oracle of
Jehovah ; for my people have been taken away for nought ;
those who rule over him how] (the oracle of Jehovah) ; and
continually, all the day, my name is reviled. ® Therefore my
people shall know my name: therefore (he shall know) in
that day » that I am he that speaketh, ‘Here am I.’

> For I, the same that promised, am here, Ges.

‘Without cause] Lit .,‘ for nothing.’
This might mean ‘without paying
a price’ (Knob., Naeg.), but the
connection would be obscured.

* and now...]_ The third
great captivity was the Babylonian.
Jehovah is represented, in anthro-
pomorphic language, as enquiring
what it was fitting for him, as the
God of Israel, to do at Babylon ;
here implies that he had come
down to see (as Gen. xviii. 21, Ex.
iii, 8, Isa. xxxi. 4). The reply to
his enquiry is involved in lii. 8, 12,
‘Jehovah returneth,’‘ Jehovah goeth
before you.’—It is only fair to men-
tion some divergent expositions
of this important passage. ‘ What
have I to do here?’ might mean
‘What sufficient cause is there for
my remaining inactive in heaven ??
So Hitzig, whom it is not fair to
answer with a charge of pagan-
izing (so Del) in the face of Gen.
xviil. 21, &c. It might also be
taken in the same sense as v. 3.
The Babylonians had paid no price
to Jehovah for his people ; of what
is. he the possessor ‘here, je., 27
Jerusalem, except a heap of stones
and prowling wild beasts ? So Nae-
gelsbach. The same view of the
meaning of ‘here’ is advocated by
Himpel, who writes to this effect.'
‘The words, What have I here?
cannot possibly refer to the Baby-
Jonian Exile. God could not be
said to be present with the Jews in
the Exile ; the misery of their con-

1 Theologische Quartalschyift, 1878, p. 309.

dition lay precisely in their sense
of the Divine alienation. They
refer rather to Jerusalem, which
indeed forms the centre of the
description. God must return to
Jerusalem, otherwise His gracious
purposes would be frustrated, but
in its present state He cannot do
so; therefore Jerusalem must rise
from its humiliation.’? True, these
words cannot refer to the Exile, but
they can refer, as remarked above,
to a (symbolic) descent of Jehovah
to judgment. Still the question
might possibly bear Naeg.’s in-
terpretation, if the continuation of
the sentence were, ‘for Zion is de-
spoiled of her children’ ; but as the
words stand, Jehovah must, I think,
be supposed to be in the place
whither (or, where) his people had
been ‘taken away,’ i.e., in Baby-
lonia.—— Taken away] viz., as a
booty (so constantly); or it may
mean ‘destroyed’ (see on liii. 8).
For nought]i.e., undeservedly.
The same word as in v. 3, but ina
different sense. How]]| i.e., tri-
umph brutally (it is the oppressors
who are spoken of—see Del’s note).

® Yherefore] i.e., because my
people is oppressed, and because
my name is reviled.——Shall know
my name] i.e., shall know by ex-
perience the meaning of my name
Jehovah (comp. on xlii. 8). ‘The
allusion to the Egyptian deliverance
is still kept up. Then God revealed
Himself most gloriously as Jehovah

Dr, Himpel is a member of the

Roman Catholic Theological faculty at Tiibingen,
2 Though the idiom ‘what have I,’ ‘ what hast thou,’ is elsewhere a formula of dis-

approval (Gesenius on xxii. 1).

See especially xxii. 16,

CHAP. LII.]

ISAIAH. 37

7 How comely upon the mountains are the feet of the
bringer of tidings, the proclaimer of peace, the bringer of good
tidings, the proclaimer of salvation, who saith unto Zion, Thy

God hath become king !

(Ex. iii, 15, &c.); now He will
again do so’ (Dr. Weir).——He that
speaketh, Here am I]i.e., He who
answereth their cry by coming in
person to help them. Dr. Weir com-
pares lviii. 9, ‘Then . . . thou shalt
cry, and he shall say, Here I am,’

7 The prophet here passes into
an ectasy. What he sees with the
inner eye, he expresses pictorially.
He has told us already of the ideal
Zion ascending a high mountain,
and acting as herald of the Divine
deliverer. Now he varies the
picture. It is Zion to whom the
herald is seen to come—bounding
over the mountains ‘like a roe or
a young hart, Cant. ii. 8, comp.
2 Sam. xviil. 24-27 Hebr. ‘ The
feet already give a greeting of
peace, before the mouth utters it’
(Stier). The prophet’s fondness for
the mountains reminds us of Eze-
kiel’s (see Ezek. vi. 1 and parallel
passages).—How comely .. . are
the feet of the messenger means
‘how welcome is his arrival’
(Lowth), or better still, ‘his rapid
approach’ (Dr. Weir). Nahum,
announcing the fall of Nineveh,
has the same image in nearly the
same words, ‘Behold upon the
mountains the feet of the bringer
of tidings, the proclaimer of peace,’
i. 15 (ii. 1 Hebr.). The one pas-
sage, or the other, is clearly an
imitation. Comp. also Rom. x. 15,
where the passage of Isaiah is
applied dogmatically, and Eph. vi.
15, where it is alluded to with true
poetic feeling ——Wwrho saith unto
Zion... ] His tidings are that
Zion’s God has resumed the crown
which he had laid aside (see on
xxiv. 23).

8 Hark, thy watchers!] Be-
cause the prophets are sometimes
called ‘ watchmen’ (vi. 10), Jer. vi.
17, Ezek. iii. 17, xxxiii. 7), it has
been supposed by Ges., Ew., Hitz.,
Knob., Del. that the prophets, ie.,

8 Hark, thy watchers! they lift up

those of the Exile (see on xl. 1), are
here referred to. But (1) this greatly
‘mars the unity and beauty of the
scene presented’ (Alexander), and
(2) the prophets in question were
(as few but Seinecke will doubt)
in Babylonia, and not in Palestine
(Naeg.). The ‘watchers’ are ideal,
supersensible beings, like those
whose voice has been already re-
peatedly heard (see on xl. 3), and
will shortly be again in lii. 11, 12;
they are also referred to in xlii. 6, 7
as Jehovah’s ‘remembrancers.’ So
too the Zion who is addressed is not
the ruined and deserted Jerusalem,
but belongs to the ideal, super-
sensible world ; it is the Zion whose
walls are ‘continually before’ Je-
hovah (xlix. 16, comp. on xl. 9).
Faith has brought down the new
Jerusalem to earth. Ring outa
ery together] ie. lift up a ‘long-
toned cry,’ like an Arab watchman
of our day (Thomson).—zye to
eye] If Jehovah can be said to
have ‘eyes’ (e.g., Zech. iv. 10, Prov.
v. 21, xv. 3), why not the heavenly
host? These friendly ‘watchers’
note every advance of the kingdom
of God (comp. Luke xv. 10); they
see it all ‘eye to eye, as a man
looks into the eye of his friend—so
near are the two worlds of sight and
of faith. Comp. Num. xiv. 14, Ex.
XXXL IT. The return of Je-
hovah to Zion] This rend. is most
favoured by the context, which
speaks of the return of the exiles
(vv. 11, 12), and not of Zion (see
v. 1). Jehovah is the leader of the
exile-band (v. 12); without Him,
what profit would there be in a
change of abode? It is the spiritual
banishment of which II. Isaiah so
pathetically complains. Comp. Ixiii.
17, ‘Return, for thy servants’ sake?
Alt. rend. is perfectly possible gram-
matically (comp. Ps. Ixxxv. 5 Hebr.),
but, with an eye to the context,
seems to me only admissible if

38 ISAIAII. [CHAP. LIL.
the voice ; they ring out a cry together ; for they behold eye
to eye ‘the return of Jehovah to Zion.© * Burst out into
a ringing cry together, ye ruined places of Jerusalem ; for
Jehovah hath comforted his people, he hath redeemed 4 Jeru-
salem. 1! Jehovah hath bared his holy arm in the eyes of all
the nations; and all the ends of the earth have seen the
salvation of our God. '! Away! away! go ye out thence, touch
not an unclean thing ; go ye out of the midst of her ; purify
yourselves, ye *armour-bearers of Jehovah! "For not in
trembling haste shall ye go out, and not in flight shall ye
proceed ; for there proceedeth before you Jehovah, and your
rear-guard is the God of Israel.

© So Targ. (‘bringeth back his Shekinah to Zion'), Kimchi, Hitz., Ew., Luzzatto,

ee Naeg.—How Jehovah bringeth back Zion, Vulg., Pesh., Vitr., Ges., Stier, Del.,
eir.

4 Israel, 2 MSS., Lowth.

e So A. E., Kimchi, Luz., Bunsen.—Most, That bear the vessels of.

‘bringeth back Zion’ be taken as
shortened from ‘bringeth back the
prosperity of Zion’ (see crit. note).

® Burst out... ] The Hebr.
has two imperatives, ‘a combina-
tion which occurs elsewhere only
in Ps. xeviii. 4’ (Alexander). Coin-
cidences with Ps. xcviii. (see vv.
2, 3) are also found in the second
half of v. 10; the authcr of that
psalm must indeed have known II.
Isaiah ‘ by heart.’

10 Wath bared his holy arm]
viz., for action (comp. Ezek. iv. 7,
Ps. Ixxiv. 11); alluding to the
sleeveless Eastern dress.

| Away !laway! ] Almost
the same language recurs in Lam.
iv. 15, but the parallel is purely
verbal Thence] Because in this
section (vv.7-12)the prophet places
himself in spirit at Jerusalem
Purify yourselves . ] With a
view to the re-establishment of the
religion of Jehovah, the returning
exiles must become legally ‘ pure’
(comp. Ps. cx. 3, if the text there
be correct), for which—see next
verse—they will have ample time.
By a striking poetic figure they are
calledarmour-bearers of Jehovah
—this is the meaning which the He-

-brew phrase constantly has. A‘man

of war’ (and Jehovah is represented
as such in v, 12) could not support
his dignity without an armour-
bearer, and a king, upon solemn
occasions, appears to have hada
troop of armour-bearers (1 Kings
xiv. 28). Much more must Jehovah
unto whom, as a Psalmist tells us,
the shields of the whole earth
belong (Ps. xlvii. 10), have a multi-
tude of armour-bearers. So else-
where (Ixvi. 15, note) He is said
to have (many) chariots. Still, alt.
rend. is perfectly tenable ; ‘vessels
of Jehovah’ may exceptionably be
used for ‘vessels of the house of
Jehovah’ (Ezra i. 7). The ‘bear-
ers’ will then be the Levites.

2 The Exodus from Babylon
was to resemble the first Exodus
only in its nobler circumstances.
Jehovah was again to be the guide
and protector of his people (Ex.
xii. 51, xiii. 21, 22, cf. Mic. ii. 13),
but that trembling haste (Ex. xii.
11) in which the first Israelites
departed was to be exchanged for
a solemn deliberateness. The pro-
phet thus modifies the earlier in-
Junction, ‘Flee ye from Chaldza’
(xlviii. 20),

CHAP. LI. 13—LI1.] ISAIAH. 39

CHAPTERS LII. 13—LIIIL

WE have already seen (notes on xlii. 1~7, xlix. 1-9) that the author of
II. Isaiah in his moments of highest inspiration conceived of the Servant
of Jehovah as an individual, and that he ascribes to Him a nature which
is (to judge from His acts) at once human and superhuman, though he
has, of course, given no hint of anything like a theory to account for this.
But no passage which we have as yet met with is so strongly individual-
ising! in its account of the Servant as the famous chapter on which we are
about to enter. So deep is the impression which it produced on Ewald
that he felt compelled to assign it in its original form to an age of perse-
cution (he thought of the reign of Manasseh), and to suppose that it
described the martyrdom? of one of the leading champions of true or
theistic religion (comp. on lvii.1). The hypothesis possesses a high degree
of plausibility ; it is recommended, not only by the character of the con-
tents, but by the singular linguistic phenomena. The style of II. Isaiah
is in general full and flowing ; the style of this chapter is ‘hard, obscure,
and awkward’ (Delitzsch), and reminds us in this respect of another
famous disputed passage, lvi. 9-lvii. 11@ (which indeed Ewald ascribes to
the same author). It is not within my present scope to discuss critical
questions of this sort; the ordinary view which accepts the continuity of
the composition is not to be too hastily rejected (comp. introduction to
lvi. 9, &c.). The Servant of Jehovah, according to Bleek, is here described
in essentially the same terms both with regard to his past and to his future,
as in xlii. 1-7, xlix. 1-9. The statement is a biassed one, and hardly does
justice to the Zeculzarity of some parts of the chapter. At any rate, one
critical point may be regarded as almost certain, viz., that chap. liii. existed
in some form in the time of the author of the Book of Job, who apparently
alludes to it (see below on v. 9).

The importance of this chapter justifies a somewhat fuller commentary
than usual. The ideas are well fitted to arrest the attention, especially
that of Vicarious Atonement, which some have laboured hard to expel
from the prophecy, but which still forces itself on the unbiassed reader: of
this I shall have to speak in a subsequent essay. The style is obscure, but
is sometimes relieved by an exquisite elegiac cadence, faintly perceptible
even in the poorest translation. To elegance my own version makes no
pretence ; only to fidelity. One word as to the tenses. We ought clearly
to carry either the perfect or the future (the latter would express the

1 I agree with Oehler (see my crit. notes on liii. 8, 9) that ‘ the supposed traces of a
collective meaning disappear when they are correctly interpreted’ (Old Testament
Theology. ii. 426).

2 Saadya thought of Jeremiah, ‘and this interpretation is attractive,’ remarks Ibn
Ezra, whose development of the comparison is worth reading (see Neubauer and
Driver, Zhe Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah, &c., pp. 43-44). Grotius (note on liii. 1)
remarks, ‘Hze notze in Ieremiam quidem congruunt pritis, sed potius sublimiusque,
seepe et magis kara Acév, in Christum.’ Bunsen unreservedly adopts the same hypo-

thesis in his Bzde/werk. But of what martyr, be he a Jeremiah or an Ignatius, could
it be said that he was ‘a guilt-offering ' (liii, 10)?

490 ISAIAII. [CHAP. LII.
ideality, the prophetic imaginativeness, of the point of view) throughout
vv. 2-10a. The inconsistent future of the Auth. Vers. in v. 2 comes from
the Vulgate (though in v. 26 this version has the perfect). The Septuagint
mostly has aorists (presents twice in v. 4, twice in v. 7, once in v. 10).
Both Sept. and Vulg. strangely give the future in v. 9.

The New Lectionary has familiarised many English readers with the
fact that lii. 13-15 belongs together with chap. liii. The traditional
arrangement is a ‘divulsio’ (as Calvin well calls it), which leads the un-
tutored reader astray. It separates the theme from its commentary, and
above all prevents the student from getting the right point of view from
which to examine the sequel (see below on vv. 13-16).

Of monographs on this chapter, six have a claim to be mentioned :—

Chr. Dav. Ant. Martini, Commentatio philologico-critica in locum
Jesate@, lil. 13-Nil1. 12 ; Rostochiz, 1791.

Franz Delitzsch, ‘Die Stellung der Weissagung Jes. lii. 13-liii?
us.w. in Zedtschr. fiir luth. Theologie, 1850, pp. 29-42 (an able defence,
since retracted, of the view that the subject of the chapter is the spiritual
Israel).

Friedrich Bleek, ‘Auslegung des Abschnittes Jes. lii. 13 ff. in Zheo-
logische Studien und Kritiken, 1861, pp. 171-218.

Paul Kleinert, ‘Ueber das Subject der Weissagung Jes. lii. 12-liii. 12,”
in Theol. Stud. u. Krit., 1862, pp. 699-752.

William Urwick, The Servant of Jehovah. A Commentary, Gram-
matical and Critical, upon Tsatah lit. 13-t?. 12. Edinburgh, 1877.

The Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah according to the Jewish Interpreters.
Vol. I. Text. By Ad. Neubauer. Vol. II. Translations. By Ad. Neu-
bauer and S. R. Driver. With an Introduction to the Translations, by
E. B. Pusey, Regius Prof. of Hebrew. Oxford, 1877.

vv. 13-15. Jehovah delivers a short but comprehensive oracle on the
wonderful course of his Servant. The predominant idea is that of his
complete success in his mission, arising from that ‘calm, deep wisdom’
which willingly accepted the vast but inevitable sufferings which lay on his
road to glory. A prospect is held out at the close of the admission of the
Gentiles to a share in his mediatorial gains.

8 Behold, my servant shall *deal wisely*; he shall be
« Prosper, Targ., Lowth, Vitr., Ges., Hitz.

18 Shall deal wisely] We might tween xlii. 15 and 4). The same

add ‘and prosperously,’ for this idea
is connoted; in Josh. i. 8, Jer. x.
21, it even predominates over the
original idea of wisdom. Ewald,
not amiss, ‘wird geschick haben.’
The rend. ‘shall prosper’ is, how-
ever, a mistake; the Divine wis-
dom of the Servant is the source
of his world-conquering faith, and
the secret of his success (comp. Hii.
116, and note the connection be-

verb is applied to the ‘righteous
Branch’ (i.e., probably, the Mes-
siah) in Jer. xxiii. 5. We cannot,
however, infer from this the iden-
tity of the two personages. The
description ‘he shall deal wisely’
belongs to any who are endued
with the Divine Spirit for practical
ends. ——He shall be high . . 4
Notice the accumulation of kindre

verbs. No single expression seemed

CHAP, LII.] ISAIAH, 4I
high and exalted, and lofty exceedingly. ' According as
many were appalled at thee, (so disfigured was his visage from
that of a man, and his form from that of the sons of men,)

bso shall he % many nations’; kings shall shut their

> So shall many nations marvel (exult Ges. ; start up, Ew.) at him, Sept.—Aquila

and Theodotion, Vulg., A. E., Calv., Vitr.,
“purify ’ ; Symmachus, ‘fling away’; Targ., Saadya,
+ Hitz,, Del, Naeg. ., ‘make to start up.’

doubtful verb,
Rashi, ‘scatter’

“sprinkle; ; Pesh.,

strong enough, for Jehovah had de-
creed to ‘super-exalt’ him (Phil. ii.
9). This suggests another parallel
with the Messiah, of whom Jehovah
says, ‘I also will make him First-
born, supreme above the kings of
the earth’ (Ps. Ixxxix. 27, Weir).
The first and second verbs occur in
combination again in ii. 12, 13, vi. I,
lvii. 15; the second and third in
lvii. 7 (all passages relating to God
or to worship)

4,15 The exaltation of the Ser-
vant is proportionate to his humilia-
tion. Were appalled] The
word expresses a stupefied surprise,
as of one who beholds a strange
reverse of fortune (1 Kings ix. 8,
Lev. xxvi. 32). Here, however, as
the following parenthesis shows,
the comparison of the spectators is
not between what the Servant was
and what he is, but between the
ordinary aspect of a man and the
degraded appearance of the Ser-
vant. Who the spectators are, will
be seen from lili. 1-4.—-So dis-
figured ...] The phrase is a
compound one. ‘To suchadegree
was his appearance disfigured ; it
was in fact removed thereby from
being that of a man, and his form
from being that of the sons of men.’
The parenthesis contains a remark
of the prophet’s ; hence the change
of person (comp. xlii. 20), which
continues naturally, though illogi-
cally, in the next verse. For strik-
ing parallels see 1. 6, Ps. xxii. 6a,
Job 11. 12 (Job being a type of the
righteous sufferer).

1 R. Y'sha‘yah ben Mali, translated

Hengst., Kay, Pusey, Weir, render the

1 So shall he % many na-
tions] A most difficult passage.
The received text has ‘So shall he
sprinkle,’ &c., which, with due regard
to Hebrew usage, can only have the
meaning which is thus expressed
by a Rabbi! ‘(So shall he) expel
and scatter them from his land,
like a man sprinkling water, with-
out one drop touching another.’
But a reference to the dispossessing
of the Gentiles by the Israelites
(comp. perhaps liv. 3) is not at all
in harmony with the context. I
see no resource left but to alter the
text, which is at any rate sounder
policy than to impose unphilo-
logical meanings on the traditional
reading. Two courses are open
to us; to supply words which may
have fallen out, or to emend the un-
translatable verb. If after ‘sprinkle’
and before ‘ many. nations’ we might
insert the words ‘ pure water upon,’
or ‘his blood upon’ (alluding to
the sprinkling of the blood of the
sin-offering—see on liii. 10), we
should obtain a really fine sense,
viz., either that the Servant of Je-
hovah by a sacerdotal act of puri-
fication (Pesh. even renders the
text ‘he shall purify’) should. re-
move the distinction between the
true Israel and the Gentiles (comp.
Ezek. xxxvi. 25), or else that he
should, by the offering of himself,
make ‘atonement for the sins of

‘many nations.’ (Compare Jerome,
below.) The context, however, is
decidedly against this view of the
sense ; for it contains. nothing to

in The Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah

according to the Fewish Interpreters, by Neubauer and Driver, vol. ii. p. 75.
Similarly R. Yoseph Qara (p. 41), the older Nizzakhon (p. go), and R. Mosheh Kohen

(p. 105).
2 Jerome :

tismate Dei consecrans servituti.’

‘ipse asperget gentes multas, mundans eas sanguine suo, et in bap-

42 ISAIAH. [CHAP. LIIL

mouths because of him; for that which had not been told
them shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall

they perceive.

suggest that the Servant is invested
with the sacerdotal office. Besides
the sacrificing function of the priest
is nowhere distinctly brought into
relation to a Messianic personage
(see Essay I11). The easiest
course, then, seems to be to sup-
pose a corruption of the text. It
is not improbable that the verb
between ‘so’ and ‘many nations’
became partly obliterated, and was
then (as such half-effaced words
often were) misread and miscopied.
It is clear to me that the sense re-
quires a word (such as ya/tér) ex-
pressing the shock of joyful surprise

with which the nations shall greet
the turn in the Servant’s fortunes,
as an antithesis to the shock of
horror in v. 14. (See further crit.
note.) — Kings shall shut their
mouths . .. ] in_ reverential
acknowledgment of his superior
dignity (see Job xxix. 9, xl. 4).
Strange paradox! The humble
Servant has become a conqueror
(see Essay V., near end). Parallel
passage, xlix. 7,——That which
had not been told them... ]
i.e., events such as it had never
entered the heart of man to con-
ceive, much less to talk about.

(CHAPTER LIIL)

Vv. 1-3. The expansion of the preceding sketch begins. ‘The com-
mentary upon “they were appalled” is given in v. 1: a large portion of
the Jews do not believe in the salvation which has appeared. The en-
largement of “so disfigured” &c., is given in vv. 2, 3. The cause of the
unbelief is, that the glory of the Servant of God is concealed behind
humiliation, misery, and shame’ (Hengstenberg). The paragraph has
this peculiarity that in each verse one word of the first half is repeated

in the second ‘ who’—‘ and not’—‘ despised’.

1 Who believed ¢that which we heard*? and the Arm of
© Our preaching, Luther, Del.—Our prophecy, Ew.—Most, Our tidings ; or, Our

message.

1 who believed] Before com-
pleting his portrait-sketch of the
Servant, the prophet expresses his
painful sense of the incredulity
with which his revelation will be
received. He does not, however,
say, ‘Quis credet auditui nostro?’
as Calvin represents him, but
‘Quis credidit?? He takes his
stand among the Israelites of a
later age (not among the Gen-
tiles, as Rosenmiiller, following
the Rabbis), and hears their peni-
tent musings on the national rejec-
tion of the prophecies respecting
the Servant, all of which were in

course of coming true. The Gen-
tiles believed as soon as they had
heard (lii, 15): Israel had heard
the voice of prophecy, but ‘who
believed?’ Hitzig, indeed, objects
that on this view of the passage we
should expect, not ‘Who believed,’
but ‘ Which of us believed,’ but the
reference is clear enough from the
pronoun in ‘that which we heard,
He would explain the clause, ‘Who,
whether Jew or Gentile, believed
that which we, the prophets, heard
(and announced) from God?’ No-
thing, however, has been said about
the prophets in the context, and

CHAP. LIII.]

* ISAIAH.

43

Jehovah, unto whom did it become manifest? * For he grew
up “before us 4 as a sapling, and as a root out of a parched
ground ; he had no form nor majesty, °and if we looked at
him, there was ® no sightliness that we should delight in him.

4 So Ew.—Before him, Hebr. text.

e That we should look at him, and .

Hitz., Ew.

this explanation compels us to
ascribe a different meaning to the
pronoun ‘we’ in successive verses.
On the other hand, the viewadopted
suits the context, and is favoured
by the analogy of xlii. 24, Ixiv. 5,
both passages embodying the con-
fessions of the people. The ‘we,’
as I understand it, is dramatic.—
The confession, involves, of course,
an unconscious exaggeration (comp.
Ps. xiv. 3, quoted by Hengst.). St.
Paul well interprets, ‘ Not all hear-
kened to the good tidings’ (Rom.
x. 16), ‘ mdlisstma interpretatio,
mentt prophetea conformis’ (Vitr.).
— That which we heard] Lit.,
‘our hearsay, or ‘our tidings.’
The noun is occasionally used
technically for a prophetic reve-
lation (xxviii. 9, 19, Ob. uv. 1, Jer.
xlix. 14); we might therefore render
‘our revelation,’ i.e., either, ‘the re-
velation communicated to us by the
prophet,’ or ‘ the revelation respect-
ing us, the Israelites’ (comp. xxiii. 5,
2 Sam. iv. 4). In either case the
speakers refer to the prophecies
relating tothe Servant. [The other
possible explanation, ‘that which
we, the prophets heard,’ has been
rejectedabove. Ithas been adopted,
indeed, by Calv., Vitr., Ges., Stier,
Urwick, but not by Hengst., Ew.,
Del., Naeg.]. — ‘The Arm of Je-

-hovah] For a commentary, see lii.
Io (and comp. note on xl. 10).——
Unto whom] Lit., ‘over whom.’
The ‘Arm’ must be ‘made bare’
in heaven (comp. xxxiv. 5), and only
a few have eyes to see such supra-
mundane sights, when nothing on
earth seems to suggest them.

2? The explanation of this un-
belief. For he grewup. . |
Lit, And... (‘and’ is here, as
often, explanatory). The tense is

. » » Symmachus, Lowth, Vitr., Ges.,

the perfect of prophetic certitude ;
all has been finished ‘before the
foundation of the world’ in the
Divine counsels. The metaphors
of v. 2 are often explained of the
pious kernel of the Jewish nation,
called ‘the poor’ and ‘the needy’
in the Book of Psalms (e.g., xxxvil.
14), and it is clear enough from II.
Isaiah (whatever be its date), that
the faithful were reduced to great
straits among their unbelieving
neighbours. Still the prophecy as a
whole is far from favourable to this
view—it refers not to the type (the
pious kernel of the nation), but to
the antitype (the personal Servant).
Before us] ‘ We had the evi-
dence of our senses to justify our
contempt of his person.’ The tra-
ditional reading does not at all suit
the context. In vv. 2, 3 we have
a picture of the unfavourable im-
pression made by the appearance
of the Servant upon his contempo-
raries. The suggestion of a con-
trast between Jehovah’s constant
good pleasure in His representative
and the people’s misapprehension
of him produces a strangely incon-
sistent feature in the picture, and
the more so if we understand ‘ be-
fore him’ in the sense which the
phrase usually has elsewhere (see
Gen. xvii. 18, Hos. vi. 2, Jer. xxx.
20), viz. ‘under the fostering and
prospering care of Jehovah.’ In
fact, we have only to paraphrase
the sentence to see how impossible
it is—‘he grew up in contempt under
the fostering care of Jehovah,’
Feeling this more or less distinctly,
Lowth, Henderson, Alexander, and
Hahn explain ‘him’ in the re-
ceived reading, of the Jewish people
collectively. This, however, is ex-
tremely harsh. As « sapling]

44

ISATAII.

[CHAP. LI.

° Despised, and f deserted of men,‘ a man of pains and familiar
with sickness! and &as one from whom there is a hiding of

f Ceasing to be of men, Symmachus, Vulg., A. E., Kay, Naeg.
& As one that hid his face from us, Sept., Vulg., Rashi, Lowth, Hengst.

For the implied figure, comp. Ps.
Ixxx. 8, 14, 16, ‘Thou didst bring

a vine out of Egypt ... Behold
and visit thisvine . . . It is burned
with fire, it is cut down’ But from

the root or stock of this outraged
vine (the people), a slender, unat-
tractive plant grew up.—A root]
i.€., a sprout from the root, as xi. 10.
Those who understand the Servant
to be the Jewish nation compare
xxvil. 6, ‘ Hereafter Jacob shall take
root; Israel shall blossom and
bud.’ The same metaphor is used
of the Messiah in chap. xi., but we
must not be too hasty in our de-
ductions from this coincidence. ——
No form nor majesty] None of
that winning grace or imposing
majesty which we should have ex-
pected in a representative of Jeho-
vah. The context implies that the
Servant made claims which his
contemporaries rejected. Andif
we looked at him] ‘If we vouch-
sated him a glance, our eye found
nothing to tempt us to cultivate his
society.’ For the rend. ‘looked at
him,’ Dr. Weir well compares Prov.
xxill. 31. (Against alt. rend., con-
sider (1) the word-play in the Hebr.
in 22réhi and mareh, as if ‘ when
we sighted him, there was no
sightliness,’ and (2) the apt remark
of Hengstenberg, ‘ How could they
have such views of the condition of
the Servant of God, if they over-
looked him ?’)

3 A series of short clauses in the
style of exclamations. Despised]
See on xlix. 7. Deserted of
men] More literally, ‘one from
whom men held themselves aloof.’
The Book of Job (a fund of paral-
lels for II. Isaiah) supplies us with
the best justification of this render-
ing. Job, who partly represents the
same conception as the Servant,
mentions this as the crown of his
troubles, ‘ My intimates hold them-
selves aloof’? (Job xix. 14; the

verbal root is the same). See crit.
note.—Obs. Job’s troubles are given
as those of a historical person , the
presumption is that the similar suf-
ferings of the Servant are described
with the same intention. —- A man
of pains] i.e., a man of many pains
(comp. ‘a man of reproofs, i.e.,
‘one often reproved,’ Prov. xxix. 1).
Auth. Vers. has, ‘a man of sorrows
and acquainted with grief, for
which comp. Ex. iii, 7 ‘For I
know their sorrows’ (lit. pains),
Eccles. vi. 2 ‘this is vanity and
a sore grief’ (lit. sickness). But
it seems better here to keep the
literal rendering, on account of the
next verse (and so, too, in Lam. i.
13, where Jerusalem exclaims, ‘Con-
sider and see if there be pain like
my pain’). Our translators were
probably influenced by Jewish ob-
Jections to the received Christian
application, such as those of Abar-
banel (see Neubauer and Driver,
op. cit., pp. 159, 160). ‘Sickness,’
no doubt, includes ‘sorrow,’ but it
means something more, viz., the
punishment of sin, just as outward
as well as inward sufferings are im-
plied in Ps. xxxviii. 3-7,_—Fami-
liar with sickness] Here, again,
the Book of Job and a psalm of
cognate purport supply our best
commentary: ‘Lover and friend
hast thou put far from me; mine
acquaintance—(they are) darkness,’
Ps, Ixxxvili. 18: comp. Job xvii. 14.
As one from whom there isa
hiding of the face] Men avoided
him with as much disgust as if he
had a disease like the leprosy.
Comp. Job’s complaint, ‘They
abhor me, they flee far from me,
Job xxx. 10 (see also xix. 13-19) ;
and the lamentation of the Jewish
exiles, ‘Men cried unto them, Go
aside! unclean! go aside! go
aside!’ (Lam. iv. 15); also the
allusion or parallel in Wisdom
(il. 15). Against alt. rend., besides

CHAP. LII1.] ISAIAH. 45

the face £! despised, and we regarded him not! ‘4 But surely
our sicknesses #e bore, and as for our pains, he carried them,
and we regarded him as stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But 4e was pierced because of our rebellions, crushed be-

the philological objection urged by
Del, consider that it directly con-
tradicts a passage in the parallel
description of the Servant’s suf-

Vu. 4-6.

ferings (l. 64)——Despisea] A
pathetic repetition in the manner
of Isaiah (Delitzsch, /sazah, ii. 134).
Comp. vz. 7.

‘The second subdivision furnishes us with the key to the

sufferings of the Servant of God described previously, by pointing to their

vicarious character’ (Hengstenberg).

Note the significant emphasis on

the pronouns ‘he’ and ‘ we,’ and the elegiac rhythm in the Hebrew.

4 But surely] Hebr., ’akéx; at
once affirmative and adversative
(see xlix. 4).—— Our sicknesses
he bore] (The meaning of ‘sick-
nesses’ has been explained above,
on ‘a man of pains.’) The mean-
ing is, first of all, that the conse-
quences of the sins of his people
fell upon him the innocent (comp.
Lam. v. 7, ‘Our fathers have sinned,
and are not; and we have borne
(sabhat) their iniquities’) ; but next
and chiefly, that he bore his unde-
served sufferings as a sacrifice on
behalf of his people (see v. 54 ‘the
punishment which was for our ‘wel-
fare’; uv. 100, ‘if he were to lay
down his soul as an offering for
guilt’; v. 126, ‘and for the rebel-
lous made intercession’), The pro-
noun ‘he’ is expressed not merely
to point the contrast between the
Servant’s deserts and his fate, but
to draw attention to his person, as
in the cases of Jehovah (xli. 4) and
‘Branch’ (Zech. vi. 13).—This is
the first of twelve distinct assertions
in this one chapter of the vicarious
character of the sufferings of the
Servant. The verb (zdsd@) may also
be rendered ‘he took away’ (as
Mic. ii. 2), and Del. thinks this
meaning is included here, but the
parallel verb (sdad/a/), which is
quite unambiguous, is against this
view. That the primary meaning
is ‘he took up, bore, Del. himself

admits, the verb asa (but not the
verb sabha/) being a technical term
in the Law for bearing the penalty
of sin. There is apparently an al-
lusion to this passage in John i. 29,
where 6 aipwv should probably be
rendered ‘that taketh up (and
expiateth) the sin of the world.’!
Obs. too that the Baptist gives
the statement a wider scope than
the prophet—‘the world’s sin,’ not
merely the people’s Stricken,
smitten of God] The phrases
evidently allude to the disease of
leprosy, which was called pre-
eminently a ‘stroke’ (Auth. Vers.
‘plague,’ e.g., Lev. xili. 3, 9, 20),
and regarded as a punishment for
grievoussin (Num. xii. 9, 10, 2 Kings
xv. 5). An Arabic phrase for a
leper is wzkdlal-ullah ‘antagonist
of Allah” (See Wetzstein’s note
in Delitzsch’s Jos, E. T., i. 347.)
Here we are again reminded of
the typical sufferer Job ; only the
account of Job’s leprosy is meant
to be taken literally, whereas here
leprosy is a figure for the sufferings
entailed bysin. In Ps. li. 7, leprosy
is a type of sin itselfm—or Goa]
belongs logically to all three par-
ticiples.

5 But he...] In emphatic
contrast to ‘and we’ in w. 4, which
again is the antithesis to ‘he’ in
‘he bare’ :—a regular chain of con-
trasts. — Pierced . . . crushed]

1 Tam glad to notice that Bishop Lightfoot has given his high authority to this

view (Ox Aevision, &c., pp. 141-2).

46

ISATAH.

[cHAP. LUI.

cause of our iniquities; the "punishment of our peace was
upon him, and through his stripes we have been healed.
° All we like a flock did go astray, we turned every one to
his own way; and Jehovah made to light upon him the

iniquity of us all.

h So Vitr., Hitz., Havernick, Del., Naeg. (note).—Most, chastisement ; Vulg.,

disciplina,

Both words are passive participles,
and imply that the sufferings volun-
tarily undergone by the Servant
ended in death. Literal wounds
are not necessarily referred to.
The same verbs are used by
psalmists in quite a general sense :
Ps. Ixix. 27 (26), xciv. 5, comp. also
Isa. i. 5. The meaning of the
statement, ‘He was pierced. .

for our transgressions,’ is perfectly
clear if the Servant is a person who
devoted his life ‘for the many.’ If,
however, he be only a personifica-
tion of the pious kernel of the
people of Israel, we must make the
rather far-fetched supposition that
the violent deaths of some in-
dividuals were imputed, as it were,
to the whole of the believing com-
munity, and that they operated
towards the conversion of the rest
of the nation. Whilst, if ‘the
Servant’ be interpreted to mean
the whole of the people of Israel,
no rational explanation of this pas-
sage seems possible (see Don Isaac
Abarbanel’s comment in Neubauer
and Driver, of. c7t., p. 177). The
punishment] Alt. rend. is de-
cidedly to be rejected, for though
Hebrew cannot distinguish clearly
between riywpia and xodaars (Arist.
Rhet., i. 10), the notion of punish-
ment is the primary one in this word
(musar); in its synonym (éokd-
khath) it is only secondary.—\ or
our peace] i.e., which led to our
‘peace’ (or welfare) ; comp. ‘a re-

proof of my shame’=a_ reproof
putting me to shame.——we have
been healed] Jerome: ‘suo vul-
nere vulnera nostra curavit.’ Vit-
ringa: ‘venustissimum 6étpepov,’

° All we... ] Consequently
‘the Servant’ can hardly be a mere
personification either of the whole
people of Israel, or of its pious
kernel, or even of the body of pro-
phets.— Did go astray] The
figure is used by Ezekiel of the
Babylonian Exile (chap. xxxiv.),
but here (as in Ps. cxix. 176) it is
the wilderness of sin into which
the whole nation has ‘ strayed.’
Made to light upon him... ]
Symmachus: karavtioat éroincer.
As the avenger of blood pursues
the murderer, so punishment by
an inner necessity overtakes the
sinner (Ps. xl. 12, Num. xxxii. 23,
comp. Deut. xxvil. 15); and inas-
much as the Servant, by Jehovah’s
will, has made himself the sub-
stitute of the Jewish nation, it fol-
lows that the punishment of the
latter must fall upon him. We
have no right, with Mr. Urwick (p.
131), to find a reference to the im-
position of hands on the Sin-offer-
ing.—The iniquity] Observe
the singular; it is the collective
iniquity of the people. We might
also render the ‘punishment,’ since
the Hebr. ‘avém includes both sin
and punishment (see Lam. iv. 6,
Zech. xiv. 19).

Vv. 7-9. The cruel treatment of the Servant, and his patient endurance
of it, form the contrast of this paragraph. Meantime his persecutors ‘know
not what they do.” Comp. the striking parallel in 1. 5-9, which is like a
prelude of our prophecy.—Obs., v. 7 and v. 9 each close with the words

‘and not...

in his mouth’; it is a mark of artistic composition.

47

7 He was treated rigorously, but Ze let himself be humbled,
and opened not his mouth: as the sheep that is led to the
slaughter, and as an ewe that before her shearers is dumb ;
and opened not his mouth. *!Thrqugh oppression and

through a judgment he was taken away, and ‘as for his gene-
ration who considered that * ‘he was cut off out of the land of

CHAP. LIII.] ISAIAH.

i Out of, Vitr., Ges. (in his note, but not his translation), Ew., Hengst., Del.,
Naeg.

k So substantially Ges., Ew., Del.—Who considereth his life-time, Calv., Vitr.,
Kay, Weir; or, his dwelling, Knob.—Who can think out his generation, Hengst.,

Seinecke, Riehm, Naeg.

7 Yreated rigorously] Treated
as slave-drivers (Ex. iii. 7, Job iii.
18), or petulant upstarts (ill. 12),
or hypocritical religionists (lviii. 3),
treat those who have the misfor-
tune to be under them. Let
himself be humbled] i.e., suffered
willingly ; see crit. note-—and
opened not his mouth] So in
two psalms of cognate purport it is
said of one who, like the Servant,
sums up and yet transcends the
finest qualities of Israel’s charac-
ter, ‘([ was) as a dumb man that
openeth not his mouth’ (Ps. xxxviil.
14), ‘I opened not my mouth be-
cause thou didst it’ (Ps. xxxix. 9).
As the sheep] ‘But I was
like atame lamb (agus mansuetus,
Vulg.) that is led to the slaughter.’
So Jeremiah speaks of himself (xi.
19), though he adds (which mili-
tates against Saadya’s and Bunsen’s
view that he is the subject of Isa,
liii.), ‘and I knew not that they had
devised devices against me.’ There
is nothing to indicate an allusion
to the paschal lamb (a premature
introduction of the typical point
of view).—Delitzsch remarks. that
‘everything that is said of the Lamb
of God in the. New Testament has
its origin in this prophecy. ——And
opened not... | Repetition, as
in v. 3.

8 A continuation of the descrip-
tion of the Servant’s sufferings. He
drank his cup to the dregs. No
ignominy was spared. The forms
of justice were indeed observed,
but the judgment or sentence was
really an act of oppression, —
Through oppression and through

a judgment] i.e., through a judg-
ment accompanied with oppression,
through an oppressive judgment
(the Vay is that of association).
So Job iv. 16 ‘ stillness and a voice’
=a still voice, Jer. xxix. 11 ‘a future
and a hope’=a hopeful future.—
‘Through’ (as in v. 5), not ‘out of,
which fails to emphasize the suffer-
ings sufficiently. ‘ Oppression,’ lit.,
‘restraint’—the shutting up of the
forces of life. The same Hebr.
word occurs again in Ps. cvii. 39,
‘And they were diminished and
bowed down through the oppres-
sion of calamity and (through)
misery.’ ‘Judgment’ = sentence, as
in ‘judgment of death, Deut. xxi.
22. He was taken away] i.ec.,
by a violent death; parallel to
‘cut off’ in the second half-verse.
Comp. ‘If the sword come, and
take him away’ (Ezek. xxxili. 4).
Or, ‘taken away’ might mean
‘released’ (Jerome, Rashi, A. E.,
Kimchi, Calv., Vitr., Stier, Hengst.,
Ges. Commentary, but not The-
saurus). But in many of these
cases the rendering seems dictated
by a preconceived notion respect-
ing ‘the Servant. and as for
his generation... ] A difficult
passage. First, with regard to the
concluding words, To whom does
the pronoun in ‘ my people’ refer?
The same pronoun occurs thrice
again in this prophecy, viz., lii. 13,
lil. 11, 12, In these verses the
speaker is clearly Jehovah. They
contain respectively the promise
which strengthens the Servant for
his trying mission (lii. 13), and the
promise which rewards its success-

48

ISATATI.

[CHAP. LIII.

the living, for the rebellion of my people ' Ae was stricken ?’!
® And one appointed his grave with the ungodly, and with the

1 They were stricken, (virtually) Targ., Ges., Hitz., Knob.—(And) for the stroke
due unto them, Ew., Kleinert.—To whom a stroke was due, Martini, Hengst.—He
was led away unto death, Sept. (see crit. note). similarly Houb., Lo.

ful accomplishment (liii, 11, 12).
The intermediate portion is the
soliloquy either of the people, or of
some individual Israelite, whether
the prophet or another. Which of
these is the speaker inv. 8? Ac-
cording to some (e.g., Knob. and
Naeg.) the prophet ; according to
Del., any one of the contemporaries
of the Servant. The latter view
seems preferable. The absolute-
ness of the self-condemnation of
the Israelites is confirmed by the
statement that not one of the
Servant’s generation ‘meditated’
on the truth that that Divine envoy’s
thread of life was cut short, and
that the ‘ stroke’ of God came upon
him, for the sins of ‘my people’
(1.e., of the people to which the
supposed speaker belongs). The
same frivolous inconsiderateness is
pointed to in a subsequent chapter
(Ivii. 14, see note) as marking the
height which the national depravity
had reached. In each case, it is
noticed with surprise that, in look-
ing back upon the career of the
early deceased righteous, men did
not perceive the lesson of these
premature removals. The lesson,
it is true, is different; here it is
this—that such a visitation (the
awfulness of which the Servant’s
contemporaries do not underrate,
as they call it ‘a stroke’ from
Jehovah’s hand) cannot have been
caused by the sins of the Servant
himself, but must have had a
mystic reference to the wickedness
of the people. It is one result of
the general inconsiderateness that,
as the next verse tells us, the grave
of this benefactor of Israel was
assigned among the most profligate
of men. [For the rend. ‘generation,’
compare, with Del., Jer. iil. 31, ‘O
(men of) this generation ! observe
ye the word of Jehovah.] The
latest explanation—! Who can think

out and declare the nature and sort
of his posterity?’—is supported
(Naeg.) by Ps. xxii. 30 (31), ‘A
seed (=posterity) shall serve him,
it shall be recounted of the Lord
to the (next) generation,’ also by
a similar passage in Ps. Ixxi. 18,
and by Lev. xxiii. 21, ‘throughout
your (successive) generations.’ Obs.
however, that in all these passages
there is something which suggests
the reference to the following gene-
ration. See further crit. note.
For the rebellion of my people]
The people, then, is distinct from
the suffering Servant. The only
way to avoid this inference is to
read ‘peoples’ for ‘my people’
(comp. on xlix. 1), with Luzzatto,
and render ‘for the rebellion of
the peoples (to whom the stroke
was due)’ Four places, it is true,
are mentioned in the Massora in
which the proposed substitution is
possible, but this passage is not one
of them.—— He was stricken] Of
the alternative renderings, that of
Ges. is grammatically the easiest,
but it is against the context. It
may be said, indeed, that the pro-
phet forgets himself for once, and
writes as if the Servant were merely
an aggregate of individuals, but this
is not very plausible. Throughout
this chapter the individuality of the
sufferer is rigidly adhered to; is it
likely that there should be one ex-
ception tothe rule? (See crit. note.)

°» and one appointed his grave
... ] ie, ‘and his grave was ap-
pointed’ (see Del.’s note). Even
‘after his death’ (for these words
qualify both members of the first
halt-verse) the people pursued its
benefactor with insults (comp. Jer.
xxvi. 23). He was buried, not with
his family, but with the open de-
niers of God, and with the rich.
Why ‘with the rich’? Dr. Weir
points out in reply, that the verse

CHAP. LI]

ISAIAT.

49

™ rich “after his death," although he had done no injustice,

™ Oppressor, Ew. (a slight emendation), Rodwell.—Ungodly, Kr. (substituting

‘transgressors’ for ‘ungodly ' before).

" In (i.e., after) his deaths, TEx1.—His grave-mound (lit., ‘his mounds’), 3 Hebr.
MSS. ,Zwingli, Lowth, Martini, Ges. (both in Thesaurus and in Transl. of Isaiah), Ew.
Kr., Bottcher, Rodwell. (A. E. also mentions this rendering.)

consists of four clauses, of which
the first and third correspond, and
the second and fourth. It might
be read thus, ‘And they assigned
him his grave with the wicked |
though he had done no violence
| And with the rich in his death |
though there was no guile in his
mouth.|’ He concludes, therefore,
that by ‘the rich’ we are to under-
stand ‘those who acquired wealth
by guile and other unlawful means,’
and reminds us that ‘ the poor’ and
‘the humble’ not unfrequently in
the Psalms stand for ‘ the righteous’
and ‘the upright.’—This, in fact,
seems to have become the tradi-
tional interpretation of the verse,
it being assumed that, according
to the experience of the Old Testa-
ment writers, riches and wicked-
ness, poverty and piety, most
commonly went together. But the
interpretation is not, perhaps, quite
satisfactory. The use of ‘the poor’
synonymously with ‘the righteous’
is no doubt established by passages
like Ps. xiv. 5, 6, cxl. 12, 13. But no
such passages can, I think, be ad-
duced to prove the synonymousness
of riches and wickedness. In Job
XxvVil. 13-19, the description of the
wicked man (as such) which isclearly
misplaced in our present text has
a special reference to Job’s case;
and the parallelism of ‘the noble’
and ‘the wicked’ in Job xxi. 28 has
no doubt a similar ground. The
difficulty may, it is true, be re-
moved by supposing that ‘the rich’
here referred to are the Baby-
lonians among whom the personi-
fied people of Israel dwelt during
the Exile. ‘By the rich, says
Yefeth ben ’Ali the Karaite, ‘are
meant the powerful men among
the Gentiles who are rich, while
Israel in exile is spoken of as poor
and needy’ (Neubauer and Driver,
op. ctt., p. 27). But, on the hypo-

VOL, II.

thesis adopted above, this account
of the Servant has reference to his
treatment by his own people, and
not by the Gentiles, who, indeed,
as lii. 15 shows, were ignorant of
him until his exaltation. I see no
alternative, but either (with Ewald)
to suppose a corruption in the text,
or to conclude that the prophet had
been led to form a more ascetic
view of life (if the phrase may be
used) than the other Old Testa-
ment writers, a view reminding us
of one or two passages which have
as peculiar a note in the sayings
of Christ; see Luke vi. 24, Matt.
xix. 23. (Knobel thinks there is
an implied contrast between the
rich Babylonians and the poor
Jewish exiles ; Ibn Ezra had pre-
ceded him in this suggestion. This
implies the theory that the Servant
= the pious kernel of the Jewish
people, which cannot hold in face
of v. 6; besides, were the Jewish
exiles literally Zoor? Gesenius
points out that there is an assonance
in rasha‘, ungodly, and ‘ashir, rich.
This does not explain the difficulty,
but is at any rate against Ewald’s
emendation.) After his death]
Comp., for rendering, Lev. xi. 31,
1 Kings xiii. 31. The plural ‘deaths’
in text-reading is commonly sup-
posed to be intensive =a violent
death, or to express the state of
death, as ‘lives’ for ‘the state of
life,’ or to indicate that the subject
of the description is a collective.
See however crit. note. Al-
though he had done no injustice]
So Job xvi. 17, ‘ Although there is
no injustice in my hands’; Job
vi. 30 (comp. xxvii. 4), ‘Is there
iniquity in my tongue?’ It is of
some slight importance for ascer-
taining the date of Isa. liii. that.
Job xvi. 17 contains (probably) an
allusion to this passage, and conse-
quently that it was written later ;

E

ISAIAII, [CHAP. LIII.

50

and there was no deceit in his mouth. ' But it pleased
Jehovah to crush him—°he dealt grievously °: ? if he were to
lay down his soul? as an offering for guilt, he would see a

© So Bleek, Hofmann.—Most, He made (him) sick ; or, To make (him) sick.

P So Vulg., Ew. (changing one letter). —Thou (O Jehovah!) wert, &c., Auth. Vers.,
De Dieu, Hitz. (substantially), Hofmann, Naeg., Weir.—Most, His soul were to make
an offering for guilt. (The verb in received text may be either 2 masc. or 3 fem.)

vv. 10-12. The Divine purpose in permitting these sufferings of the in-
nocent Servant, and the Divine decree concerning his recompence.—The
three verses of this paragraph are very skilfully connected. First, each of
them has the word ‘his soul’ inthe first half-verse. Next, vv. 10 and 11
have each of them the word ‘he shall see’ immediately after ‘his soul,
Finally, both v. 11 and v. 12 enforce the limitation implied in ‘the many,’
There is a further connection both in contents and in phraseology between
this and the second paragraph, which the student can work out for

himself.

at any rate the words in Isa. liii. 9
flow more easily and naturally than
in Job xvi. 17.

10 It pleased Jehovah ... ]
This was the thought with which
the second paragraph closed. It
was no mere accident, but the de-
liberate will of God that the Servant
should suffer innocently. (Comp.
Ps, xxii. 15 4, ‘ Zhou placest me in
the dust of death.’) The deepest
wisdom underlay this apparent
contradiction. ‘If he were thus
to suffer for the guilty, he would
become the author of a new and
better race.’ v. 10 is not a con-
tinuation of the soliloquy of the
people, but a reflection of the pro-
phet’s. See Last Words, at end of
this vol. If he were to lay
down his soul . . .] (The phrase
parallel to ridévae ray Wuyny, John
x. 11.) The passage cannot merely
mean that Jehovah would spare the
people of Israel for the sake of its
few pious members (though this is
in itself an unobjectionable idea ;
comp. Gen. xviii. 24, Jer. v. 1, Ezek.
xxii. 30). The Servant is a person,
not a personification of the pious
kernel of Israel. His sufferings are

vicarious and voluntary. Hence he
who offers the Servant’s ‘soul,’ or
‘life’ as a sacrifice, must be the
Servant himself, and not Jehovah,
as the common reading (see note?)
implies. Jehovah sends the Ser-
vant, and the Servant joyfully ac-
cepts the mission. He smites, and
the Servant bends willingly to the
blow, ‘pours out his soul unto
death,’ ‘lays it down as an offering
for guilt.” But why is it added, ‘as
an offering for guilt’? Dr. Ritschl,
in his great work on the doctrine of
Justification,! finds it hard to say.
Yet may it not be one object of the
prophet to show that in the death
of the Servant various forms of
sacrifice find their highest fulfil-
ment? ‘As in verse 5 the Divine
Servant is represented as a szz-
offering, His death being an exfza-
tion, so here He is described asa
guilt-ofering, His death being a
satisfaction’? Guilt-offerings, or
trespass-offerings (as Auth. Vers.
calls them), ‘were enjoined in ali
cases where the sins which had
been committed allowed of restitu-
tion in kind’; in other words, in
infractions of the rights of property.

1 Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und der Versihnung, ii. 64.

2 Urwick, The Servant of Fehovah, p. 151.

3 Cave, Scriptural Doctrine of Sacrifice, p. 478. (On the subject of the 'dshim,
or guilt-offering, see especially Kalisch, Leviticus, ii. 272-5; Ewald, Antiquities of
Israel, pp. 55-56; Riehm, ‘ Ueber das Schuldopfer,' in Theolog. Studien u. Kritiken,
1854, p. 93 &c.; Oehler, Old Testament Theology, ii, 28-34 ; Wellhausen, Geschichte
dsracls, i. 75-77+)

CHAP. LIII.]

ISAIAH. 51

seed, he would prolong days, and the pleasure of Jehovah
would prosper in his hand; | 4 after the travail of his soul he

4 On account of, Vitr., Del., Bleek, Urwick ; free from, Ges., Hitz.

The people of Israel was theoreti-
cally ‘holy,’ i.e., dedicated to God,
but in fact was altogether unholy.
It had therefore fallen under the
Divine displeasure, and its life
was legally forfeited. But, in wrath
remembering mercy, Jehovah sent
the Servant, who offered his own
life as a restitution in kind, and a
‘satisfaction’ for the broken cove-
nant of holiness. There is, how-
ever, a difficulty in the statement
that the servant became a guilt-
offering, which ought to be men-
tioned. According to the Law, the
guilt-offering was only an atone-
ment for the individual presenting
it, never for other people (Luzzatto):
the sin-offering, of course, might
be offered for others (on the Day of
Atonement). This can only be met
by the hypothesis that the Servant
is in some mystic and yet real sense
identified with Israel ; that he em-
bodies all that is high and noble
in the Israelitish character, and yet
transcends it. The prophet him-
self, too, gives us a plain hint that
his language is symbolic, and that
more is meant than meets the ear.
For he proceeds to tell us that the
Servant shall live long and receive
a glorious reward. (It would bea
still simpler solution tosuppose that
the distinction between sin-offer-
ing and guilt-offering was not very
clearly drawn when the prophet
wrote ; but this would require us
to adopt the Grafian hypothesis as
to the date of the Levitical legisla-
tion. It would be unfair to import
the huge difficulties which beset
this question into the comparatively
simple subject of the exegesis of
Isaiah. Against Wellhausen, see
below, Last Words)——He would
see a seed... ] It is said in

a psalm closely allied to our pro-
phecy, that, after the deliverance
of the Sufferer, ‘A seed shall serve
him’ (viz., Jehovah), Ps. xxii. 30.
In this case, the ‘seed’ means
the children of the converts from
heathenism mentioned in the pre-
ceding verse (see Hupfeld ad Joc.).
Our prophet too evidently uses
‘seed’ in a spiritual sense of those
who are mystically united to the
Servant (or, more prosaically, his
disciples)! Obs., the Servant is
not merely to leave a seed behind
him, but to ‘see it,’ which har-
monizes admirably with the next
clause. He would prolong
days] i.e, he would live long.
This again is of course not to be
taken quite literally. ‘Length of
days’ is no doubt frequently men-
tioned as a reward of piety (Deut.
vi. 2, Ps. xci. 16, Prov. iii. 2), but
as the Servant has already passed
through death once without injury
to his personality, we may presume
that, like the Messiah in ix. 6 (see
note), ‘death hath no more dominion
over him.’ The pleasure of
Jehovah ...] The Servant is
not to retire henceforth from the
scene of his sufferings; he has a
work to do in and for his spiritual
posterity and for mankind in gene-
ral, and the appellation given to
it supplies a good example of the
interlacing of the parts of this
prophecy, ‘pleasure’ in the sense
of ‘ purpose’ occurring no less than
eight times in II. Isaiah.

il After the travail of his
soul] It is not easy to choose be-
tween the different meanings of the
preposition. I haverendered‘ after’
on the analogy of Ps. Ixxiii. 20,‘ As
a dream, after one hath awaked,’
but the local meaning ‘away from’

1 David Kimchi alludes to this interpretation as current among the Christians in
his time, but rejects it because ‘his (Jesus’) disciples are nowhere spoken of as either
sons or seeds’ (Neubauer and Driver, of. cz¢, p. 55); Mosheh Kohen (zééd., p. 123)
with at least an attempt at philology, on the ground that ‘ seed is only used (in the Old

Testament) in its literal and primary signification.’

But, as Dr, Pusey remarks (zézd.,

p. lviii.), ‘Isaiah himself uses the word in a bad sense’ (he quotes i. 4, lvii. 4).

E2

52

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. LIIL.

would see satisfyingly ; by "his knowledge" would the right-
eous one, my servant, make the many righteous, and of their

¥ The knowledge of him, Vitr., Hengst., Stier, Naeg.

(Num. xv. 24), and the causal ‘on
account of, ‘in consequence of’ (v.
5), are both grammatically possible.
To adopt the last, however, seems
to involve an anticipation of the
‘therefore’ in v.12. ‘ The travail
of his soul’ =the pain which he felt
in his inmost soul, his spiritual
agony. He would see satisfy-
ingly] i.e., would enjoy a satis-
fying, refreshing view of the pro-
gress of the Divine work of salva-
tion (Del.). So in Ps. xvii. 15 we
find ‘to see God’s face’ and ‘to be
satisfied,’ in parallel lines. By
his knowledge] There isa doubt
(which Calvin himself recognises)
as to whether this means ‘by the
knowledge of him’ or ‘by the
knowledge which he _ possesses.’
Vitr., Hengst., Stier, Naeg., adopt
the former ; Ges., Ew., Hitz., Bleek,
Del., Kay, Birks, Urwick, the latter.
Of course, ‘knowledge’ (in the
deep Biblical sense of the word)
was necessary for the ‘justified’
persons spoken of (comp. Jer. xxxi.
34), but it is more obvious, con-
sidering the prophetic functions
assigned to the Servant (comp. xhi.
1, xlix. 6, 1. 4), to suppose that
‘knowledge’ means his insight into
the dealings and purposes of Jeho-
vah. It is clear, too, from other
passages (referred to by Del.), that
‘knowledge,’ in this sense, was
reckoned as essential for the national
regeneration (see Mal. ii. 7, ‘The
priest’s lips should keep knowledge;’
Dan. xii. 3, where faithful teachers
are described as ‘ making righteous
(or, justifying) the many’ ; and Isa.
xi. 2, where among the seven spirits
bestowed on the Messiah we find
‘the spirit of knowledge’). The
contents of the Servant’s knowledge
are, no doubt, the purpose of God
to make the many righteous by
his means. There are two possible
meanings of the phrase ‘to make
righteous,’ the forensic one of ac-

quittal (v. 23, Ex. xxiii. 7), and the
ethical one of imparting or pro-
ducing righteousness. The latter
is the less common one, the only
other passage which Ges. quotes
for it being Dan. xii. 3. There,
however, the meaning is quite cer-
tain, for the ‘understanding ones’
who ‘ make the many righteous’ are
in Dan. xi. 33 said to ‘instruct the
many.’ In the passage before us,
too, the sense of ‘making righteous’
or ‘turning to righteousness’ (the
felicitous rendering of Auth. Vers.
in Dan. xii. 3) seems the only suit-
able one, for the Servant is not
himself a judge or justifier, but a
sin-bearer and intercessor (v. 12).
Heis called ‘ the righteous one,’ as a
guarantee of his ability for ‘ making
righteous. —-The many] It is
not absolutely certain whether this
phrase (emphatically repeated in
v. 12) points to the Jews or to the
heathen. As the foregoing prophecy
refers to the Jews, and as the same
phrase is used of the Jews in Dan.
1X. 27, Xl. 33, 39, Xil. 3, it is safer to
interpret itso here. This will not
exclude the incorporation of more
or fewer of the Gentiles among the
true Israelites (see on xliv. 3-5),
and in fact an enlargement of the
limits of Israel seems required by
the magnificent language of v. 12 a.
Besides, was not the Servant to be
‘the light of the nations’ as well as
‘a covenant of the people’ (slii.
6)? The phrase ‘the many’ seems
intended to imply that not the whole
of the community is benefited by
the saving work of the Servant.
Comp. the use of ‘many ’in similar
contexts in Matt. xx. 28, xxvi. 28,
Heb, ix. 28. And of their ini-
quities . This cannot mean
(for the explanation involves New
Testament presuppositions) _ that
the Servant should continue to be
a sin-bearer after his sacrifice of
himself, It is rather an emphatic

CHAP, LIv.] ISATAH. 53

iniquities Ze would take up the load. ' Therefore will I give
him *a portion among the great,’ and with the powerful shall
he divide spoil, because he poured out his soul unto death, and
let himself be numbered with the rebellious, but Ze had borne

the sin of many, and for the rebellious made intercession.

* So Ew., Hitz., Del.

As a portion the many, Sept., Targ., Vulg., Vitr., Lowth,

Hengst., Bleek, Kay, Naeg., Weir, Urwick, Rodwell.

reassertion of the vicarious atone-
ment as the foundation of his right-
eous-making work,

2 Jehovah himself holds out the
victor’s crown with the words—
Therefore will I give him a por-
tion among the great] This is
clearly metaphorical, and as such
is not to be pressed too far. For
who can be ‘great’ or ‘ powerful’
enough to share spoil with Jeho-
vah’s Well-beloved? It is impos-
sible to think of the persons just
described as ‘made _ righteous’
through the Servant, for this ‘ mak-
ing righteous, together with the
preceding atonement, was the very
fight which the Servant fought and
won. The idea is, no doubt, this,
that, without striking a blow, the
Servant of Jehovah has reached
the same results which others (e.g.,
Cyrus) have reached by sword and
bow ; that, ‘through his sacrificial
death, the kingdom of God enters

into the rank of world-conquering.
powers’ (Hengst.). Thus the Ser-
vant of Jehovah becomes at last
practically identical with the Mes-
sianic king.—Alt. rend. is opposed
by the parallel line; otherwise it
would not be unacceptable (comp.
lii. 15, xlix. 7). Poured out his
soul] i.e., his life-blood (comp.
Ps. cxli, 8). The prophet again
emphasises the voluntary nature
of the Servant’s sufferings. ade
intercession] Or, ‘kept making
intercession’ (but as the preceding
and synchronising verb expresses
a single past act, the rend. ‘made
intercession’ seems _ preferable) ;
certainly not ‘shall make interces-
sion’ (Hengst.), which is against
syntax. The participle of the same
verb occurs in a different context
in lix. 16, Notice the emphatic
repetition of ‘the rebellious,’ those
who had merited death by their
apostasy.

CHAPTER LIV.

A RECENT critic (Wellhausen, Gesch. [srae/s, i. 417 note) has stated that
liv. I-liv. 8 is ‘to some extent a sermon on the text lii. 13-liii. 12,’ but
he obviously does so in the interests of a theory—viz., that chap. lili does
not refer to an individual. It is more natural to suppose that chap liii,
(including lii. 13-15) was inserted by an afterthought, chap. liv. being the
natural sequel of xlix. 17-lii. 12 (just as xlix. 13 follows upon the pre-
diction of the return of the exiles in xlix. 12). It cannot be shown that
any of the characteristic ideas of chap. liii. are clearly referred to in
chap. liv. The connection seems the closest with chap. xlix. (see xlix. 6,
8, 18-20, 21, comp. also |. 1), though there is a phraseological parallel in
lii. 9, and the use of the term ‘righteousness’ in v. 17 accords with its use
in xlv. 24, 25, 1. 8, but not at all with the sense of ‘righteous’ and ‘make
righteous’ in liii. 11.—The person addressed is not the ruined city of
Jerusalem, but the ideal Zion (see on xlix. 14), who is practically identical
with the ideal or spiritual Israel. In v.17 the promises made to Zion are

54 ISAIAH. [CHAP. LIV.

expressly confirmed to the ‘servants of Jehovah,’ just as in chap. li. the
prophet addresses alternately the aggregate of believers and the tran-
scendental person called Zion.

’ Ring out, O barren, thou that hast not borne ; burst forth
into a ringing shout, and cry aloud, thou that hast not travailed;
for more are the children of the desolate than the children of
the married woman, saith Jehovah. * Widen the place of thy
tent, and the curtains of thy habitation let them stretch forth
—hinder it not ; lengthen thy cords, and thy tent-pegs make
strong. *For on the right and on the left shalt thou break
through; and thy seed shall *take possession of* nations,
and make desolate cities to be inhabited. ‘4 Fear not, for thou
needest not be ashamed: neither be confounded, for thou
needest not blush ; nay, thou shalt forget the shame of thy
maidenhood, and the reproach of thy widowhood thou shalt

® Dispossess, Ges., Hitz.

1 © barren, thou that hast not
borne] It is like a continuation of
xlix. 21. More are the children
. . .] Parallel passage, 1 Sam. ii. 5.
The ‘children’ referred to are,
mainly at any rate, the restored
exiles (as xlix. 17). These were
at once children of Zion and not
children. They were physically
and to some extent spiritually
Israelites, but as long as they
were on a foreign soil, and un-
baptized with the Spirit (xliv. 3),
their union with the ideal Zion
could not be regarded as com-
plete. After their restoration, the
spiritual and the literal Zion or
Israel became identical.

2 The curtains] i.e., the tent-
covering. Lengthen thy cords...]
The same figure is applied to the
literal Jerusalem, xxxili. 20. The
point of both passages is that the
‘tent should no longer be moved
about, but become a permanent ha-
bitation. Dr. Weir well compares
Jer. x. 20, ‘Mytent is destroyed, and
all my tent-pins are plucked up;
my children are gone away from
me, and are not ; and there is none
to spread out my tent any more, or
to set up my tent-curtains.’

3 On the right and on the
left] Not mercly=‘on the south

and on the north’ (Targ.), but ‘on
all hands’ ; comp. the parallel pas-
sage in the promise to Jacob, Gen.
XXVill. 14. ‘Take possession of
nations] i.e., take possession [of
their land. There is no occasion,
with Knobel, to restrict the refer-
ence to the heathen colonists who
had replaced the Israelites. On the
other hand, I doubt whether it is
equivalent to ‘inherit the earth’ (so
Del.). Comparing xlix. 19, 20, I
suppose it to mean that the area
covered by the Jewish race shall
be much larger than of yore, and
that the former lords of the soil (or
their survivors, see next note) shall
(of their own free-will—see Ixi. 4)
descend to the rank of subjects.
Desolate cities] Primarily
those of Palestine, comp. xlix. 8,
Iviii, 12, 1xi. 4, but possibly includ-
ing cities outside Palestine, which
had suffered from the Babylonian
invasions (comp. x. 7, Hab. i. 17),
and been converted into ‘heaps’
(xiv. 21, corrected text).

‘ Needest not] Or, ‘oughtest
not.’ It is the potential imperfect
in the Hebrew. Be ashamed]
viz., of thy faith in thy God ; comp.
xlv, 16, 17. Thy maidenhood]
i.e., the time before the Sinaitic co-
venant, by which Israel became the

CHAP. LIV.] ISAIAH. 55

remember no more. *For thy husband is thy maker—
Jehovah Sabdoth is his name ; and thy Goel is the Holy One of
Israel, God of the whole earth is he called. ® For as an out-
cast and downcast woman Jehovah hath recalled thee, and a
wife of youth—® can she be rejected >? saith thy God. 7 For
a little moment did I cast thee out, but with great compas-
sion will I gather thee ; in a gush of wrath I hid my face a
moment from thee, but with everlasting loving-kindness will I

have compassion upon thee, saith thy Goel, Jehovah.

9¢ For

a Noah’s flood ° is this unto me ; whereas I sware that Noah’s

» So Kimchi, Ew., Luz.—When she is (or, is being) rejected, Targ., Vitr., Ges., Del.
¢ Asin the days of Noah, Pesh., Targ., Vulg., Saad., some Hebr. MSS., Lowth,

{See crit. note.)

‘bride’ of Jehovah, Jer. ii. 2. The
shame of this period will be the
Egyptian bondage; the reproach
in the next line, the Babylonian
captivity.

> Thy maker] The Hebr. has
the plural form, ‘thy makers,’ on
the analogy of Elohim for the one
God (similarly in x. 15; comp. Job
xxxv. 10, Ps. cxlix. 2). Thy
Goel] i.e., the vindicator of thy
family-rights (see on xli. 14). Zion
being of the family of Jehovah
(comp. Eph. ii. 19), her nearest
kinsman (viz., her husband) must
interpose for her rescue.——The
Holy One of Israel] Comp. on
xlix. 7. God of the whole earth

..) ‘Jehovah Sabdoth,’ accord-
ing to our prophet, means not only
the God of the heavenly hosts, but
the God whose glory fills all crea-
tion, including the earth (comp.
appendix to chap. i.). Hence the
name is a warrant for the restoration
of Zion, Jehovah Sabdoth’s bride.

° For as an outcast and down-
cast woman...] (There is a
characteristic assonance in the
Hebrew.) Zion is not only Jeho-
vah’s bride (Jer. iii. 14), but in one
sense ‘a wife of youth ;’ see Jer.
ii. 2. Even many an earthly hus-
band (how much more, then, Je-
hovah !) cannot bear to see the
misery of his divorced wife, and
therefore, at length recalls her;
‘and when his wife is one who
has been wooed and won in youth
(comp. Mal. ii. 14), how impossible

is it for her to be absolutely dis-
missed!’ The second line is hard,
but such appears to be its meaning.
So interpreted, it involves a break
in the parallelism, but only form-
ally, not logically. (It is equiva-
lent to ‘cannot be rejected,’ and is
therefore parallel to ‘hath recalled
thee”) There is a very similar
way of expressing incredulity with
regard to the absolute rejection
of Israel in Lam. v. 22, ‘Except
[which is impossible] thou hast
Indeed rejected us, and art wroth
against us very exceedingly!’ For
the idea of such declarations, see
note on lv. 2 (end). Alt. rend
would be grammatically easier, if
the tense were the perfect (which
indeed, the Targum substitutes).

7 For a little moment] The
same phrase in xxvi. 20, comp. Ps.
xxx. 5, and Isa. lxi. 2 (note).
Gather thee] i.e., the persons of
thy ‘ storm-tost’ members (v. 11).

8 xn a gush of wrath] It was a
‘gush, not a flood, for this takes
time to rise and fall ; a momentary
‘gush,’ in contrast to the sea-like
(Ps. xxxvi. 6) righteousness, one
side of which is God’s ‘everlasting
loving-kindness’ for his people.
The assonance in the Heb. phrase
is here inimitable.

® For] Justifying the promise
just given. Yes, it is indeed true,
for the ‘calamity’ which is ‘over-
past’ zs in one sense a flood to its
Divine author,—a Noah's flood,
inasmuch as He has sworn that

56 ISAIAII. [CHAP. LIV.

flood should no more pass over the earth, so I swear that I
will not be wrath with thee, nor rebuke thee. 1° For though
the mountains should remove, and the hills should totter, my
loving-kindness from thee shall not remove, neither shall my
covenant of peace totter, saith he that hath compassion upon
thee, Jehovah.

" Thou afflicted, storm-tost, comfortless one! behold, I
will set thy stones in antimony, and will found thee with
sapphires; !?and I will make thy battlements rubies, and thy
gates to be carbuncles, and all thy border to be precious

neither the type nor the antitype
shall be repeated.—Critics have
been unnecessarily perplexed be-
cause neither the Elohistic nor the
Jehovistic portion of the narrative
of the Flood mentions an oath.!
But, as Del. on Ps. Ixxxix. 31-38
well points out, there is no oath
recorded in 2 Sam. vii. 12-16, yet
no one doubts that the oath men-
tioned in v. 35 means the promises
therein contained. I conclude
therefore that the prophet refers
either to Gen. viii. 21, or to ix. II,
and not to a lost portion of the
Jehovistic record, as Kayser con-
jectures.?

10 Though the mountains... ]
Mountains are elsewhere the em-
blem of the unchangeable, Ps. xxxvi.
6, lxv. 6. Job, however, knows of
the uncommon phenomenon of a
mountain falling and crumbling
away (Job xiv. 18), and our prophet
has already applied a similar con-
tradiction of ordinary experience
to glorify the immutable love of
God (xlix. 15). Stier thinks there
is an allusion to the final destruc-
tion of the earth (li. 6); but is
not the image more forcible as
explained above? The striking
parallels, Ps. xlvi. 3, Jer. xxxi. 36,
37 (quoted by Dr. Weir), point in
the same direction. My ccve-
nant of peace] ‘Peace’ is a very
comprehensive expression (see on

liii. 5), though, when in conjunction
with ‘covenant,’ its primary mean-
ing seems to be ‘friendship’; comp,
Ps. xl. 9, ‘the man of my peace’
(Auth. Vers. ‘mine own familiar
friend’). The phrase ‘my covenant
of peace’ occurs again in Num. xxv,
12 (comp. Mal. ii. 5), Ezek. xxxiv.
25, XXXVI. 26. Saith ... Je-
hovah] A fourth emphatic asser-
tion of the Divine origin of the
revelation.

"1 The glory of the new Jeru-
salem. Comp. Tobit xiii. 16, 17,
Rev. xxi. 18-21.

"| Phy stones in antimony] A
dark cement would set off the bril-
liant stones mentioned directly
afterwards. Antimony (Hebr. pa/,
Arab. ul or koh) supplied the
black mineral powder sometimes
called alcohol, with which the
Jewish women stained the edges
of the eyelids. See 2 Kings ix. 30,
Jer. iv. 30, 1 Chron. xxix. 2 (Q. P.B.),
and comp. Qerenhappik (i.e., ‘horn
of eye-paint’), Job xlii. 14. There
isa puyaku or puka mentioned in
Assyrian and Egyptian inscriptions
as a product of the land of Canaan.
M. Chabas, it is true, says it meant,
in the Egyptian text, articles of
furniture made of carved wood °;
but there is no doubt, I believe, of
its meaning antimony in Assyrian.*

Border] i.e., either ‘domain’
(Del.), or ‘outer wall’ (Knob.).

1 See Gen. viii. 21, 22 (Jehovistic), and ix. rx (Elohistic).
2 Kayser, Das vorexilische Buch der Urgeschichte Israels (Strassburg, 1874),

p. 168.

3 Chahas, Eludes sur Tantiquilé historique, p. 274.
4 Sayce, R. P., ve 42; Oppert, Lapciidion en Mdsopotamie, ii, 349.

od

CHAP. LIV.] ISAIAH.

stones ; 3 and all thy children shall be disciples of Jehovah,
and great shall be the peace of thy children. “Through
righteousness shalt thou be established ; be far from ¢ oppres-
sion, for thou needest not fear, and from ¢destruction, for it
shall not come nigh thee. Behold, should (any) ‘stir up
strife,’ (it is) not of me, whosoever £ stirreth up strife against
thee, shall "fall because of" thee. '® Behold, it is I that
created the smith, who bloweth upon the fire of coals, and
produceth a weapon ‘for its worki; and I that created the
waster to destroy. 17No weapon that is formed against thee

4 Anxiety, Ges., Hitz., Ew., Del.
¢ So virtually, Knobel. —Terror, Ges., Ew., Del., &c.
f So Ew., Kay (as an alt, rend.), —Gather together, A. E., Kimchi, Vitr., Ges.,

Del., Naeg.
& Gathereth together, A. E., &c.
h So Knob., Del.,

Naeg.—Fall away unto thee, Sept., Vulg., Ges., Hitz., Ew.

! As his work, Ew., Weir.—According to his work (or, craft), Vitr., Ges., Hitz.,

Del., Naeg.

The latter seems more probable,
as we have had the battlements
and the gates mentioned.

13 The spiritual glory of which
these costly buildings are the
symbol.— Disciples of Jehovah]
ie, prophets in the wider sense
(comp. 1. 4). The same idea as in
Num. xi. 29, Joel ii. 28, 29.

14 Jerusalem will then be im-
pregnable. —— Through right-
eousness]| i.e., through fidelity to
thy covenant with thy God ; comp.
i, 27.——Shalt thou be estab-
lished] A return to the figure of
building, comp. Prov. xxiv. 3, Num.
xxi. 27 (Weir). Be far] i.e.,
either ‘be far even in thy thoughts,’
comp. xlvi. 12 ‘ye who are far
from (the thought of Jehovah’s)
righteousness’ ; or =‘thou shalt be
far, the imperative for the future
(see on xxxill. 20). Oppression]
This is the sense of the word
‘asheg everywhere else, and also
as I believe, of the feminine form
‘asWgah’ (xxxvii. 14, see note),
generally quoted for the sense of
‘anxiety.’ It also suits the parallel
line best. Destruction] The
well-known sense of m’kAzttah in
Proverbs (e.g., x. 14); see also
Jer. xvii. 17.. The ordinary rend.
‘terror’ does not agree well with
‘come to thee.’

15 Should (any) stir up strife

‘Should any one presume

to molest God’s people, he shall

be like a blind traveller, who falls

headlong over an obstacle.’ See
crit. note.

16 The secret of Israel’s invinci-
bility ; all things are the creatures
of Jehovah, and dependent upon
him. That created the smith]
Similarly Sirach says (xxxviii. 1) of
the physician, ‘The Lord hath
created him.’ For its work]
viz., destruction. This rend. is
grammatically as good as any
other, and suits the parallel line
best (comp. ‘to destroy’). The
waster] i.e., each of the great con-
quering kings, of Assyria, Baby-
lonia, Persia, &c. In the same
spirit of unreserved faith, Job says
(xii. 16), ‘He that erreth and he
that causeth to err are Jehovah’s.’

17 Every tongue shalt
thou show to be guilty] War
is here viewed as a ‘judgment of
God’; comp. xli. 114. I doubt if
1 Sam. xiv. 47 is parallel; we
should probably read, ‘he was de-
livered’ (i.e., was victorious), with
Sept., Ewald, &c. (see Q. P. B.).
This is the inheritance . . .]
‘This,’ viz., all the blessings which
have been assured to Zion. The
form of this second half of the

58 ISAIAH. [cHap. Lv.
shall prosper, and every tongue that shall rise against thee
for the judgment shalt thou show to be guilty. This is the
inheritance of the servants of Jehovah, and their righteous-

ness given by me; the oracle of Jehovah.

verse is evidently designed to close
the prophecy. The servants of
Jehovah] The members of the
spiritual Israel have now been fully
baptized into the Spirit of their
Head. Each of them is now an
Israel in miniature, and can claim
the promise-laden title of ‘Servant
of Jehovah.’ (See above, opening

remarks.) Their righteous-
ness] i.e., primarily, as the context
shows, their justification in the eyes
of the world, their success (comp.
xlv. 24, 25, 1. 8, lviii. 8, Ixii. 1, 2),
though it is also implied that this
outward success is due to Jehovah’s
‘ righteousness.’

CHAPTER LV.

Contents.—An affectionate invitation to the Messianic blessings
(vv. I-5); an exhortation to put aside all inward obstacles to their enjoy-
ment (vv. 6, 7) ; and a renewed confident assurance of the indescribable
glory and felicity which awaits the true Israel (vv. 8-13).

1 Ah! every one that thirsteth—come ye to the waters; and
he that hath no money! come ye, buy and eat, yea, come, buy
wine and milk for that which is not money and for that which

1 An! every one that thirsteth
...] Acry of pity (see on xvii.
12) wrung from Jehovah by the
indifference of his people to the
promised blessings. Dry as they
are, they are indisposed to come to
the only source from which their
thirst can be quenched. In this
respect they differ from the ‘thirsty
one’ of xliv. 3, who opposes no in-
ward bar to the relief of his neces-
sity. The prophet’s invitation is
addressed to all who are conscious
of their need. Buy wine and
milk] ‘Wine and milk’ are not to
be understood merely in a material
sense, as representatives of tem-
poral blessings (Ges., Hitz., Knob.);
this is altogether against the con-
text, as the following notes will
show. At present it may be enough
to point out the very peculiar word
for ‘buy’ (shabhar), which, alike
by etymology and by usage, can
in strict propriety only be used of

‘corn.’ Its use here shows that
the food referred to can be called
equally well ‘bread’ and ‘ wine and
milk,’ i.e., that it belongs to the
supernatural order of things.—It
was this passage which led to the
custom of the Latin churches (but
not the African) of giving wine and
milk to the newly baptized (Jerome,
ad loc.). See note on xxv. 6, and
comp. Jer. xxi. 12, Ps, xxxvi. 8,
John vii. 37-39, I Pet. ii. 2, Rev. xxi.
6, xxil. 17.——For that which is
not money . . .| To guard against
a literalism similar to that of the
disciples in Matt. xvi. 7. Jehovah
being not merely (as some of the
Jews probably supposed) a mag-
nified man, his blessings can only
be obtained for ‘that which is not
(i.e., which is different in kind from)
money.’ Comp. xxxi. 8, where
Jehovah is called ‘one who is not
(i.e, who is specifically different
from) a man.’ This ‘not-money’

CHAP. LV.]

is not a price.

ISAIAH.

ag

? Why will ye spend money for that which is

not bread, and your earnings for that which cannot satisfy ?
Hearken, hearken unto me, and eat ye that which is good,

and let your soul delight itself in fatness.

is, as v. 3 instructs us, the hearing
of the inner ear.

* Not bread] i.e., even -less
satisfying than bread. Among
other oxymora, comp. Deut. xxxil.
21, where Auth. Vers. rightly has,
‘that which is not God .. . those
which are not a people, i.e., which
is (are) conspicuously unworthy of
the name.—— Eat ye] i.e., ye shall
eat.——Delight itselt] i.e., luxu-
riate ; comp. Ixvi. 11, Ps. xxxvii. 4,
I1 (same word), and see on lvii. 4.

3 And I will make an ever-
lasting covenant with you] The
new ‘covenant’ between Jehovah
and Israel is referred to no less
than seven times in II. Isaiah: no-
where, expressly at least, in the
rest of the book, and nowhere in
the works of Isaiah’s contempo-
raries, Amos and Hosea. The idea
of the original covenant, broken
by Israel, and renewed by Jehovah,
is specially characteristic of Jere-
miah. In the pre-Jeremian period,
it seems as if the phrase ‘ covenant
of Jehovah’ had been avoided by
the great author-prophets on ac-
count of its associations with
heathenism, for the Canaanites
used the phrase largely (comp.
‘Baal-b’rith,” Judg. viii. 33, ix. 4;
‘El-b’rith, Judg. ix. 46). The oc-
currence of the phrase in Isa. xl.-
Ixvi. is certainly difficult to explain
on the assumption that Isaiah was
the author of these chapters. Can
we venture to suppose that Isaiah
foresaw that a time would come
when the phrase ‘the covenant of
Jehovah’ would lose its original
mythic flavour? It would seem a
rather forced hypothesis. — ‘An
everlasting covenant’ occurs again
in lxi. 8, and ina different sense in
xxiv. 5; also in Jer. xxxii. 4o, 1. 5,
Ezek. xvi. 60. It is of course the
‘new covenant’ of Jer. xxxi. 31-33
that is intended, that ‘covenant’
which Jehovah promised to ‘put

3 Incline your ear,

in Israel’s inward parts, and to
‘write it in their hearts.’ The
loving-kindnesses of Davia] Not
‘the mercies of David’ (Auth.
Vers.), for David, representing the
Davidic race, is not a ‘stranger
and foreigner,’ but a member of
Jehovah’s household, his own‘ son’
(2 Sam. vii. 14, Ps. ii, 7, Ixxix. 26).
‘Of David’ means ‘promised to
David ;’ ‘the loving-kindnesses of
Jehovah’ is the more natural
phrase, comp. Ixiii. 7, Ps. Ixxxix.
49, cvii. 43, Lam. iii. 22 (‘ the loving-
kindnesses of David’ occurs else-
where only in 2 Chron. vi. 42). It
is not necessary to suppose a
zeugma, though a Pduline speech
in the Acts (xiii. 24), in quoting the
passage, inserts the words—not
found in Sept.—déc@ tpiv (ra dora
Aaveld rd mora); the ‘covenant’
consists in the ‘ loving-kindnesses.’
Of David] “In what sense can
Jehovah’s ‘loving-kindnesses’ be
said to belong to David. Three
answers may be given: (1) The
most obvious explanation (Ewald,
Delitzsch) is, to understand by
‘David’ the founder of the Da-
vidic family. The only difficulty
is that the statements of the fol-
lowing verse are incongruous with
the character of the historical
David. (2) Nota few interpreters,
both ancient and modem (among
the latter are Rosenmiiller, Stier,
G. F. Oehler, and Dr. Kay) in-
terpret the phrase of the Messianic
king, who is mentioned in Jer. xxx,
9, Ezek. xxxiv. 24, 25 (Hos. iii. 5 ?)
under the name of David. This,
however, seems to be contradicted
(2) by the parallel passage, Ps.
Ixxxix. 49 (which clearly refers to
the ‘ oath’ to the historical David in
2 Sam. vii.), and (4) by the perfect
tenses in v. 4, which (considering
that futures follow in v. 5) ought
not to be interpreted as ‘ prophetic
perfects.’ (3) According to Heng-

60

ISAJAII.

[cHaP. Lv.

and come unto me; hear, and your soul shall revive: and I
will make an everlasting covenant with you, the loving-kind-

nesses of David—the unfailing ones.

stenberg (Christology, iii. 346),
David here means the family of
David, ‘who, in Ps. xviii, and in
a series of other psalms, speaks
in the name of his whole family.’
Hengstenberg thus admits that the
historical covenant with David is
primarily referred to, but, as the
covenant extended to David's seed,
he maintains that it only attained
complete fulfilment in the Messiah.
Our choice lies, I think, between
this and the first theory. Only, if
we adopt the view that David
means the founder of the Davidic
family, we must assume that it is
not of the historical David that the
prophet is thinking, so much as of
an idealized David radiant with the
reflected light and spirituality of
the Messianic age. This assump-
tion (which, considering the phe-
nomena of the Book of Psalms, we
have a perfect right to make) seems
to be required by the statements
made respecting ‘David’ in the
next verse. The attempt of Del.
to apply them literally to the David
of history is most unsatisfactory.
On the whole, however, I prefer
Hengstenberg’s view. There seems
to me to be an evident allusion to
2 Sam. vil. 12-16, where the pro-
mises refer to David's posterity (v.
13, which interrupts the context, is
probably a later insertion). The
same point of view is still more
clearly adopted in Ps. Ixxxix., of
which Koster (ap. Stier, p. 548)
says, ‘Fere commentarii instar est
ad locum nostrum—similitudo tanta
est, ut prophetam nostrum psalmi
hujus | auctorem esse conjicere
liceat.’ The un ailing ones]
See Ps. Ixxxix. 28,‘ My loving-kind-
ness will I keep for him for ever,
and my covenant shall be unfailing
(or faithful) with him ;’ and v. 33,
Nevertheless my _ loving-kindness.
‘will I not annul (and take) from

4 Behold, for a witness

him ; neither will I be untrue to my
faithfulness ;? and comp. in the
Hebr. 2 Sam. vil. 16. And why
thus faithful, thus unfailing? 1.
Because Jehovah’s word cannot
be broken (v. 11), and 2. because,
whereas vengeance for sin ends at
the fourth generation, the recom-
pence of piety extends to a man’s
latest posterity (Ex. xx. 5, 6).

4 Fora witness to the peoples
I appointed him] ‘I appointed
him’ is a historical perfect; we
have no right (note the difference
of tense) to regard vv. 4, 5,as‘a
looking forward to the enlarge-
ment and completion of the Church
through [the] Christ’ (Stier). Of
course, it was not in any high de-
gree true of David that he was
‘a witness to the peoples,’ ie, a
preacher of the true religion. Zhat
was the proper work, first of the
personal Servant of Jehovah, and
then through him (lili. 11) of Je-
hovah’s national Servant, the re-
generate Israel (xlili. 10). But
David, and far more Hezekiah and
Josiah, at any rate made a begin-
ning, even though at the best it
was a ‘day of small things.’ And
the peculiarity of II. Isaiah is that
the promises, so imperfectly realised
hitherto, are transferred from the
Messianic king to what we may
call the Messianic people, not in-
deed to the people working in its
own strength, but in conjunction
with and in dependence on a per-
sonal representative of Jehovah,
who unites in himself the leading
characteristics of king, high priest,
and prophet.!. There seems to be
an allusion to our passage in Rev.
i, 5 (comp. ili. 14), ‘from Jesus
Christ the faithful witness’; Hengst.
compares John xviii. 37, where,
precisely as here, ‘witnessing’ is
mentioned as the principal function
of Israel’s King.—a ruler] Or,

1 Comp. Riehm, Afesstanic Prophecy (Lond. 1876), pp. 130, 131, who however
denies the personal character of the Servant in the most important passages.

CHAP. Lv.] ISATALI. 61

to the peoples I appointed him, a ruler and commander of
the peoples. * Behold, people that thou knowest not shalt
thou call, and people that have not known thee shall run
unto thee, because of Jehovah thy God, and for the Holy One
of Israel, inasmuch as he hath glorified thee.

6 Seek ye Jehovah, while he may be found; call ye upon
him, while he is near. 7’ Let the ungodly forsake his way
and the man of iniquity his thoughts; and let him return
unto Jehovah, and he will have compassion upon him ; and
to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. * For my thoughts
are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, is
Jehovah’s oracle. ° For (as) the heavens are higher than
the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my
thoughts than your thoughts. 3° For as the rain cometh
down, and the snow from heaven, and thither returneth not,
except it hath watered the earth, and made it bring forth and
sprout, and given seed to the sower, and bread to the eater ;
‘'so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth ; it
shall not return unto me empty, except it hath accomplished
that which I please, and made to prosper the thing for which

‘a prince’ (zagid, the same word
as in 2 Sam. vi. 21, Dan. ix. 25).

> People that thou knowest
not ...] Almost the same words
are put into the mouth of a per-
sonage who embodies a very simi-
lar conception to the Servant of
Jehovah, in Ps. xviii. 43 (45 Hebr.).
F Because of Jehovah ...
Repeated almost word for word in
Ix. 9.

6 The prophet returns to the
more neutral-tinted present, and
urges his people to make sure that
they are of the true Israel.——
While he may be found] Comp.
Ps. xxxii. 6. For the ‘day of
Jehovah’ will be a bitter one for
those who are outwardly or in-
wardly his foes (Ixv. 6, 7).——Call
ye upon him] First for pardon,
and then for a share in the pro-
mises ; comp. Jer. xxix. 12-14.

7 His way] The ‘ way’ and the
‘thoughts,’ or purposes, of the un-
godly, mean the polytheism and
immorality which marked a large

section of the Jewish exiles. Such
‘ways’ and ‘thoughts’ tend only to
destruction, but those of Jehovah
(as vv. 8, 9 suggest) to a blessed-
ness passing the finite understand-
ing (comp. Ps. xxxvi. 5, 6). ‘For I
know the thoughts which I have to-
wards you, saith Jehovah, thoughts
of peace, and not of evil, to give
you a future and a hope’ (Jer. xxix.
II).

10 But can such a high ideal as
Jehovah’s be realised? Surely. For
God’s purposes, whether for inani-
mate nature or for man, fulfil them-
selves. The new figure is suggested
by ‘the heavens’ in wv. 9. Thi-
ther returneth not] i.e., as vapour
(Gen. ii. 6, Job xxxvi. 27 Del.).
Obs. rain and snow are treated as
God’s angels (similarly Ps. cxlviii.
8, civ. 4), and so Jehovah’s ‘word’
in v. 11 (see on ix. 8).

1 xt shall not... J] A mixture
of two statements—‘it shall not
return empty,’ and ‘it shall not
return till it has done its work.’

62 ISAIAH. [CHAP. LVI.

I sent it. !? For with joy shall ye go forth, and with peace
shall ye be led, the mountains and the hills shall burst out
before you into a ringing sound, and all the trees of the field
shall clap the hand. ' Instead of the thorn-bush shall come
up the fir-tree, and instead of the nettle shall come up the
myrtle-tree: and it shall be unto Jehovah for a monument,

for an everlasting sign which shall not be cut off.

12,13 Yor] is explanatory (=‘in
fact’). Shall ye go forth. . . ]
The passage is generally taken as
a description of the Exodus from
Babylon. But there is no reason
for so limiting the meaning, and the
analogy of chap. xxxv., xl. 11, and
xli. 18, points in another direction.
It is the glorious condition of Israel
after the Return which is here de-
scribed (see on chap. xxxv.) The
change is compared to the transi-
tion from the wilderness (i.e., the
misery of the Exile) with its mo-
notonous dwarf-shrubs to a park of

in the midst of which Israel is to
walk ‘in solemn troops and sweet
societies’ (as in xxxv. 9). Who
the leaders are to be, is not stated.
Perhaps the priests, or perhaps
Jehovah’s angels (Ps. xci. 11).

13 This sympathy of nature
(comp. xxxv. I, 2, xliv. 23) is no
mere poetical figure, forthe prophet
continues, And it shall be unto
Jehovah . for an everlasting
sign: all poetical figures, like
Virgil’s ‘ Ipsi laetitid voces ad sidera
jactant Intonsi montes,’ are pre-
sentiments of the Messianic re-

beautiful trees (comp. xli. 18, 19), ality.

CHAPTER LVI. 1-8.

These eight verses form a prophecy in themselves, directed against
the Jewish pride of race. They are primarily addressed to certain
foreign converts and (probably) Israelitish eunuchs, who are warmly
commended for their observance of the Sabbath (comp. lviii. 13, 14), and
promised an appropriate reward. Like chap. Iviii., this prophecy stands
out by its practical tone ; as a rule, II. Isaiah confines itself to correcting
the general tone and spirit of the Jews. It is moreover worthy of re-
mark that the circumstances which it refers to are those of a period long
subsequent to the age of Hezekiah. The Sabbath was not indeed (as
some have supposed) a late adoption from Babylonia, but it certainly did
become much more strictly observed in the Babylonian and Persian
periods—comp. Jer. xvii. 19--27 (with Graf’s note), Ezek. xx. 11-21, xxii.
8, 26, Neh. xiii. 15-22, and contrast the narrative in 2 Kings xi. 1-16,
with that in 1 Macc. ii. 32-38. This growing strictness evidently marks
a fresh stage in the religious history of the Israelites. As the sense of
the value of prayer increased (a lasting monument of which is the
Psalter), it was natural that the Sabbath should rise in the estimation of
the pious, and that the highest title they could give to the temple should
be ‘the house of prayer’ (sce on v. 7). The latter phrase is unique, and
reminds us of the later proseuchaz, which existed wherever Jews and
Jewish proselytes were to be found in the Roman empire. Prayer in

CHAP. LVI] ISAIAIL.

63
fact took the place of the sacrifices, and the Sabbath (instead of being a
day for sacrificing, comp. i. 13) became a day of prayer. In a certain
sense, Hosea’s anticipation (ii. 13) was verified ;1 the old, popular Sab-
bath passed away, but only to reappear, animated with a fresh spirit. As
Shylock’s ‘by our holy Sabbath’ attests, the Sabbath became the great
bond of the dispersed Jewish people.

All this should be duly considered in determining the date of this
prophecy and that of chap. lviii. The problem is a complicated one, and
a solution must be sought elsewhere. The same difficulty has been felt
by some in admitting Jeremiah’s authorship of Jer. xvii. 19-27, which
‘stands in absolutely no connection with the preceding and the following
prophecies.’ ?

NOTE. The remark made above on the growing strictness of the
observance of the Jewish Sabbath acquires special importance in view
of the recent discovery of an Assyrian Sabbath—a ‘dies nefastus,’ on
which the king at any rate was closely restrained from almost every form
of activity. We do not as yet know how far this severe rule extended in
Assyria, but may fairly conjecture that the sacerdotal influence was more
extensive there than either in Israel or in the Judah of the pre-Babylonian
periods. In the time of the Prophet Hosea, the Sabbath was, at any
rate in Israel, a bright and cheerful day (Hos. ii. 11). On the Assyrian
and Babylonian Sabbath, see Sayce, An Assyrian Grammar for Com-
parative Purposes, 1872, p. 140, and comp. letter in Academy, Nov. 27,
1875, p. 554; &.P., i. 164, vii. 157 &c., where Sayce produces ample
authority for the statement that the word Sabbath itself, under the form
sabattu, was at least not unknown to the Assyrians ; also F. Brown, ‘The
Sabbath in the Cuneiform Records,’ Presbyterian Review, Oct. 1882 ;
Lotz, Questionum de Historia Sabbati Libri Duo, Lips. 1813.

1 Thus saith Jehovah, keep the law, and practise righteous-
ness ; for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness

1 Keep the law] ‘ The law, i.e.,
the objective rule of life, the law of
Jehovah (as in xlii.1 4). The other
possible rendering, ‘ justice,’ seems
unsuitable here, as the moral duties
specified in v. 2 have a much wider
range than mere ‘justice,’ and in
fact cover both the tables of the
Decalogue. The verb, too, with
which the noun is here joined
(shimri mishpat) is usually fol-
lowed, as Dr. Weir remarks, by
‘statutes, ‘testimony,’ ‘covenant,’
&e. Righteousness] i.e., objec-
tively, whatever God commands.
— My salvation... my right-

eousness] Comp. li. 5. ‘ This pas-
sage makes it quite evident that
“righteousness” in connection with
“salvation” still retains its proper
force of righteousness. God’s sal-
vation is righteous, not indiscrimi-
nate. And the grounds on which
he distinguishes His people from
His enemies are not external but
internal. It is the Israel within
Israel, the spiritual circumcision,
the “holy seed,” that He acknow-
ledges, vindicates, rescues, glorifies
... “There is no peace to the
ungodly.”’ (Dr. Weir.) See also
note on xli. 2. Sept. here has 76

1 Wellhausen refers to Lam. ii, 6 as expressing the same view as Hosea, but over-

looks ‘in Zion.’ Gesch. Israels, i. 118.

2 See note on this passage, by the present writer, in the Pulpit Commentary on

Jeremiah. .

64

to become manifest.

ISAIAII.

(CHAP. LVI,

? Happy the mortal who practises this,

and the son of man who taketh hold thereon; who keepeth
the Sabbath so as not to pollute it, and keepeth his hand,

that it do no evil!

€\eds prov.——To become mani-
fest] God’s gifts are ‘reserved
in heaven’ till at the fit moment
the veil of partition is rent in twain.
The same verb as in lili. 1.
This . thereon] i.e., ‘the law,’
and ‘righteousness,’ a further ex-
planation of which follows. —-The
Sabbath] Sabbath-keeping is the
representative of the duties of ‘the
first table’ (as in Ezek. xx. 11-21).
Contrary to etymology (see Del.’s
note), and contrary to popular usage
(who does not remember Heine’s
Prinzessin Sabbath?), the prophet
treats ‘Sabbath’ as if it were of
the masc. gender (so lviii. 13).——
Keepeth his hand .. . ] A nega-
tive description, suggested by the
parallelism of the Sabbath-observ-
ance. It reminds us of xxxiii. 15,
only that there a positive description
precedes, which has here to be
supplied mentally.

3 The prophet now devotes him-
self to remove a misunderstanding.
He insists that the beatitude of the
preceding verse is universally appli-
cable to those who keep God’s com-
mandments. And let not the
foreigner ...] The anxiety of
these proselytes seems rather un-
reasonable, if we remember only
the moderation of the law in Deut.
xxiii. 4-7. It becomes less so, if
we take into consideration the se-
vere spirit of the restored exiles
(comp. Neh. xiii.), which doubtless
began to show itself during the
Captivity. The foreigners seem
to have apprehended (such is the
point of view at which the prophet
places himself) that in consequence
of this severity the Deuteronomic
law would be so altered as to ex-
clude many who were formerly ad-
missible intothe community. With

3 And let not the foreigner, who hath

the glories of the Messianic age in
prospect, it must have been miser-
able indeed for these earnest con-
verts to feel themselves in danger
of exclusion.—And let not the
eunuch say .. . | The complaint
of the eunuch is different from that
of the proselyte ; it is that he is ‘a
dry tree,’ i.e., that he is without that
hope of a quasi-immortality in off-
spring, which had, it would seem,
not yet given way to the brighter
hope of personal continuance.
Apparently he takes his exclusion
from the religious community as a
matter of course ; the law in Deut.
xxlll. 2 was clear, and there seemed
no probability of its being miti-
gated. But an answer is vouchsafed
to his silent as well as to his spoken
complaint. (I infer from the omis-
sion of the clause, found in v. 3,
respecting voluntary adhesion to
Jehovah that the prophet alludes
to Israelitish eunuchs, made such
against their will by heathen tyrants
—‘eunuchs were generally foreign-
ers, ! as Dr. Weir remarks.) The
case of the eunuchs is dealt with
first. The decision is: 1. that they
shall be admitted to religious com-
munion, and 2. that, as a compen-
sation for their childlessness, they
shall receive an _ extraordinary
trophy and monument in the
temple itself. What sort of dis-
tinction is intended by this? Some
(e.g., Knobel) suppose that it is a
material record. We might think
either of a memorial column, or of
a tablet such as in very ancient
synagogues commemorated the
munificence of individuals.2 But
there is a swing about the passage
which rather commends the view
that the memorial is a spiritual one
(as in Rev. iii. 12). The prophet’s

1 Comp. xxxix. 7, Jer. xxxviii. 7, Acts viii. 27 (Dr. Weir thinks the Ethiopian
eunuch in the last passage may have been a Jew; comp, Acts xi. 20).
2 See Low's Bettrige sur fiudischen A lterthumskunde (Leipz. 1870-71, i. 28).

CHAP. LVI.] ISAIAH. 65
joined himself to Jehovah, speak, saying, Surely Jehovah will
separate me from his people ; and let not the eunuch say,
Behold, Iam a dry tree. ‘For thus saith Jehovah of the
eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, and choose the things which
please me, and take hold on my covenant,—*I give unto
them in my house and within my walls a trophy and a monu-
ment better than sons and daughters, I will give to each an
everlasting monument, which shall not be cut off. ®And as
for the foreigners that have joined themselves unto Jehovah,
to minister unto him, and to love the name of Jehovah, be-
coming his servants, every one that keepeth the Sabbath so
as not to pollute it, and taketh hold on my covenant: 7I will
bring them to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in
my house of prayer ; their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices
shall be acceptable upon mine altar; for my house shall be

called a house of prayer for all the peoples.

real meaning is probably closely
analogous to that of another New
Testament passage (Matt. xxvi. 13),
‘Wheresoever this gospel shall be
preached in the whole world, there
shall also this, that this woman
hath done, be told for a memorial
of her.’

‘4 Take hold on my covenant]
Whether circumcision or Sabbath-
observance is the outward sign of
this ‘taking hold, cannot be ab-
solutely determined. Here, as, in
Ezek. xx. 12, the Sabbath seems to
have stepped into the place of cir-
cumcision ; yet in lii. 1, Ezek. xliv. 9,
circumcision is again referred to
with honour.— An everlasting
monument .. . ] Closely parallel
to xlv. 13 4.

®° and as for the foreigners]
The proselytes too shall not be left
outside in heathendom ; the joy of
the Shekinah shall be theirs. Comp.
1 Kings viii. 41-43, where Solomon
prays that God would ‘da accord-
ing to all that the stranger calleth
to thee for,’ and Ps. cxxxv. 19, 20
(where, after the house of Israel, of
Aaron, and of Levi, ‘those that fear
Jehovah ’—i.e., the proselytes—are
called upon to bless him). To
xoinister unto him] Hitz. and
Knobel think servile ministrations

VOL. II.

8 The oracle of

are referred to, such as were per-
formed by the Nethinim slaves
(comp. Ezra ii. 43). Usage, how-
ever, confines the verb to honour-
able functions, especially those o.
the priests and Levites; comp.
lxi. 6. Dr; Weir appositely refers.
to Ixvi. 21, where the addition of
some of the Gentiles to the num-
ber of the priests is spoken of.
His servants] A lower term than
‘ministers,’ but joyfully accepted
by the proselytes out of ‘love’ to
the ‘naine of Jehovah,’

7 Make them joyful] A hint
perhaps of the feast described in
xxv. 6, ——In my house of prayer}
Parallel passage, § Kings viii. 29,
comp. 43, 60. Sacrifices continue,
but prayer takes the precedence of
them as the distinctive purpose of
the temple. Only the circumcised
could take part in the sacrifices, but
all who ‘called upon the name of
Jehovah, of whatever nation or
country, could offer the ‘ spiritual
sacrifice’ of prayer, Thus in a
certain sense the ‘ court of the Gen-
tiles’ became the holiest part of the
temple, and could be called at a
later period ‘Jehovah’s house’
(John ii. 16, comp. Matt. xxi. 13),

® Phe oracle of the Lord, Je~
hovab] It is not common to

¥

66

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. LVI. 9—LVII.

the Lord, Jehovah, who gathereth the outcasts of Israel: Yet
more will I gather unto him, besides his own gathered ones.

place such a phrase at the be-
ginning of a sentence; see, how-
ever, i. 24, Ps. cx. 1, Zech. xii. J,
where this or an almost identical
expression is used as an introduc-
tion. The combination ‘the Lord
(Hebr. Adonai) Jehovah’ prepares
us to expect some great and new
revelation. The addition of Gen-
tile members to the community of
the true Israel is, however, though
a great, not by any means a new
announcement (see xliv. 5, lv. 5).
This, along with other peculiarities,
has to be taken into consideration
in the discussion of the unity of

seology reminds us of xi. 12. Comp.
also xlix. 5, 6. ——Yet more will I
gather... ] Those whoareto be
gathered are evidently Gentiles, of
whom the proselytes mentioned in
the preceding verses are the first-
fruits—‘other sheep which are not of
this flock’ (John x. 16). Del. com-
pares Ps. xlvii. 9 (10), which, if the
text-reading be correct, is even
strikingly parallel. The reading of
Sept. and Pesh. (‘with the people’),
however, strikes me as intrinsically
more probable; in this case the
passage should be compared with
Isa. xix. 24. Unto him] viz., unto

chaps. xl.- lxvi. ‘Whogathereth Israel.

the outcasts of Israel] The phra-

CHAPTER LVI. 9—LVII.

A SUDDEN change in the style warns us that we are about to enter ona
new prophecy, complete in itself, and with no connection (at any rate in
the mind of the original writer of lvi. 9 &c.) with the preceding dis-
course. Hengstenberg,! indeed, has tried to evolve a connection (‘ gather-
ing ’—see lvi. 8—must, he remarks, be preceded by ‘scattering’), but few
writers will regard his attempt as satisfactory. ‘It is absolutely in-
credible, in the opinion of Bleek, ‘that the prophet, after the promises
that no evil of any kind should again hurt the people (ch. lv.), that the
time of salvation was quite near, in which even the foreigners among the
people should partake (ch. lvi. 1), should now suddenly summon up
foreign nations to devour his people.’

The new prophecy falls into two parts. In the first half (Ivi. 9-Ivii. 2)
the writer chastises the neglect of duty for profane and extravagant
luxury on the part of Israel’s spiritual ‘shepherds,’ while no one observes
how the righteous are one by one gathered in from a generation fast
ripening for a Divine judgment. In the second half (Ivii. 3-21) he turns
to the mass of the people, who mock at the few servants of Jehovah in
their midst. He draws a vivid and appalling sketch of the sombre and
licentious idolatry into which they and their fathers, the Jre-E.x7/e Israel-
ites, have fallen :—on the state of religion among the exiles in Babylon
he preserves a deep silence. At v. 11 a change in the prophet’s tone is
observable. In the name of Jehovah, he remonstrates with his people,
and even partly excuses it. He promises a Divine interposition in its
behalf; and then it will be seen whether the idols can deliver in the
judgment which will overtake all but true believers. The prophecy closes

1 Christology of the Old Testament, ii. 176,

CHAP. LVI] ISAIAH, 67
with that honied rhetoric of which only Hoseaand the writer of II. Isaiah
possess the secret.

According to Ewald,! Bleek,” and Gritz,’ the whole of this discourse,
down to lvii. 11 @ (or 13 @, Gratz), is a quotation from an older prophet ot
the time of Manasseh, or soon after. The strikingly Palestinian cha-
racter of the scenery in lvii. 5, 6, the presumed reference to persecution
in lvii. 1, and the correspondence of the sins imputed to the people with
pre-Exile circumstances, give a strong plausibility to this hypothesis.
Even Luzzatto* (who ascribes all the rest of the book to Isaiah) con-
siders the author of this section to have lived during the reign of
Manasseh—vv. 1, 2 he considers to be a funeral song in memory ot
Isaiah, who, according to the legend, was sawn asunder by order of
Manasseh.

In my former work (/. C. 4., p. 201) I attempted to diminish the force
of Ewald’s reasoning, and I may now add (1) that it seems to me rather
doubtful (see below) whether Ivii. 1 refers to a violent death by persecu-
tion, (2) that the persecution of Manasseh is not directly affirmed in
the Old Testament—it is an inference from a combination of passages,
(3) that, even granting its historical reality, Manasseh’s is not the only
persecution which might be alluded to—Gesenius refers to the narratives
of Daniel and his three friends (Dan. iii. vi.). But it does not fall within
the scope of this work to decide questions relative to the higher criticism ;
and I merely mention these conjectures because they embody impressions
which have been felt by most students of Isaiah, whatever be their
attitude towards the tradition of the Synagogue. The style of the former
part of the prophecy by its ‘harshness and lapidary brevity’ reminds
Delitzsch of that other most peculiar and isolated passage, lii. 13-liii. It
is doubly remarkable following upon the facile oratory of chaps. lv. lvi.
1-8, and not less surprising is the sudden change in the latter part to
rhythmic simplicity and ease.

9 All ye wild beasts of the field, come to devour; all ye

wild beasts in the forest!

9 all ye wild beasts] ‘My
flock became food for every wild
beast of the field, because there
was no shepherd’ (Ezek. xxxiv. 8,
comp. xxxix. 4). ‘ Thy prophets, O
Israel, are become like the foxes
in the deserts’ (Ezek. xiii. 4). A
closer verbal parallel is Jer. xii. 9
(comp. v. 7): ‘Assemble ye all the
wild beasts of the field; bring them
hither to devour.” Comp., too, the

10 His watchmen are blind, they

imitation in Rev. xix. 17, 18.—The
‘wild beasts’ are evidently the
enemy, and Israel is the flock.
The prophet adopts the strongest
way of expressing that Israel, ut-
terly bereft of his natural defend-
ers, lies at the mercy of the great
heathen empire (Assyria or Baby-
lonia).

10 His watchmen are blind
. .. ] ie, the leaders of the people

1 Die Propheten, iii. 102, 103 ; comp. Ewald’s account of the persecution of Ma-

nasseh in Aizstory of Israel, iv. 211, 212.

2 Introduction to the Old Testament, ii. 48.

3 Monatsschrift, 1883, p. 112.

Gritz ascribes the prophecy to Jeremiah, and

attaches it to Jer. xi. ; Ewald too remarks upon its great similarity to the earlier pro-

phecies of Jeremiah.

4 [1 profeta Isata (Padova 1867), p. 573.

F2

68

ISAIAH. [CHAP. LVII.

are all of them undiscerning; they are all of them dumb
dogs, they cannot bark, * raving, lying down,* loving to slum-
ber. ' But the dogs are greedy, they know not how to be
satisfied, and these, >the pastors,” know not understanding ;
they all of them turn their own way, each after his gain, with-
out exception. '?‘Come ye, let me fetch wine, and let us
carouse with strong drink ; and to-morrow shall be as this
day, beyond all measure great.’

LviI. ' The righteous perisheth, and no man taketh it to
heart, and pious men are gathered, none considering that °be-

® Seers that lie down, some MSS., Symmachus, Vulg. (?), Kohut (another read-

ing).
> Shepherds, Hebr. text.

¢ Before, Del.—Out of the way of, Kay.

generally, but especially the pro-
phets (Ezek. iii. 17, comp. Isa. xxi.
11—different word), who are com-
pared to ‘dumb dogs, as opposed
to the faithful shepherd’s dogs (Job
xxx. I). We must suppose that the
prophets referred to were no better
than the ancient soothsayers, who
gave oracles respecting the difficul-
ties of every-day life, but were silent
on the great moral questions. Be-
sides their ‘dumbness,’ three other
points are mentioned to the dis-
credit of the writer’s fellow-‘ watch-
men’:—i, they are not ‘seers’
(khézim), but ‘ravers’ or ‘ dream-
ers’ (Aézim)—they depend on a
mere natural, and sometimes fal-
lacious, faculty (Jer. xxiii. 25-28) ;
2, they keep up the old custom, re-
jected by the higher prophets as an
abuse, of taking fees, Num. xxii. 7,
1 Sam. ix. 7, Neh. vi. 12, comp.
Mic. iii. 3, Ezek. xiii. 19, xxii. 25 5
and, 3, they spend their gains in
revelry, comp. xxviii. 7, Mic. ii. 11.
—Obs., no inference can be safely
drawn from this passage as to the
date of the prophecy, since prophets
and elders continued to exist during
the Exile, see Jer. xxix., Ezek. viii.
I, xiv. I, Xx. I, xxxiii, 1-9.

1 Phese, the pastors] Or,
‘these, pastors as they are.’ Some,
rendering ‘shepherds,’ think we
have here a second figure; but
this would come in limpingly after
the highly developed simile of the

dogs. It is better to render ‘ pas-
tors, and regard it as an official
title of the rulers of the people
(comp. Assyrian 72% ‘shepherd,
‘prince’). ‘Without exception]
On the rend., see De Dieu on Ezek.

xxxill, 2. Same idiom in Gen.
xix. 4.
% Come ye... ] Aspeechof

one of the self-indulgent ‘ pastors,’
who invites his fellows to a two
days’ banquet. Comp. v. 11, 12,
and especially xxviii. 1, 3, 7, which,
by the similarity of its details,
somewhat confirms the theory of
Ewald and Bleek.

1 The righteous perisheth] A
concise and vigorous expression,
fitted to stimulate thought. That
the bad pastors should live long
and see good days, while the
righteous (especially among the
pastors or prophets) are prema-
turely cut off, is a contradiction
peculiarly great from the Old
Testament point of view (comp.
Eccles. vii. 15). ‘The righteous,’
in the singular, indicates the few-
ness and isolation of these Abdiels.
*Perisheth’—whether by natural
or by violent means, the word does
not expressly state. ‘To perish’
(Hebr. ’ashadh) properly means ‘to
lose oneself, in other words, ‘to
pass out of sight’; every one re-
members Ps. cxix. 176, where ‘lost’
= Hebr. ’dd/édh. The same vague
expression is used in the parallel

CHAP. LVIL.]

cause of the evil the righteous is gathered.

ISAIAH.

69

2?He entereth

into Peace ; they rest upon their beds, whosoever hath walked

passage, Mic. vii. 2 (comp. Ps. xii.
1).——Pious men] Lit., ‘men of
piety. The Hebr. word here ren-
dered ‘piety’ (£iésedh) includes both
love to God and love to man; the
context must decide whether ‘piety’
or ‘mercy’ is the better English
equivalent. Here the parallel word
‘the righteous’ is decisive, in spite
of the fact (which warns us against
a mechanical use of the Concord-
ance) that in the only other place
where the precise Hebrew phrase
occurs (Prov. xi. 17, in the singular)
it means, not ‘the pious,’ but ‘the
merciful.’ Are gathered] Again
a vox media, which includes the
notions of taking away (comp. xvi.
10) and gathering in (as Jacob
“was gathered to his kinsmen,’ Gen,
xlix. 33). It is difficult to decide
which of these two notions is pre-
dominant here. A comparison of
liii. 8 seems to suggest the former ;
it is natural that the ‘servants of
Jehovah’ (liv. 17) should suffer with
the Servant, the members with the
Head. There might conceivably
be an allusion to a religious perse-
cution, such as that of Manasseh
(see introduction, above). But the
context seems to me to favour the
notion of ‘gathering in” How
could the ungodly, if the deaths of
the righteous were owing to them,
be expected to ‘consider’ the
Divine purpose in permitting their
evil deeds? and does not the ten-
der, elegiac tone of v. 2 suit a
natural better than a violent death?
None considering that] The
form of expression reminds us of
liii. 8. In both passages, the rend.
‘for’ seems awkward (see, however,
Naeg.).——Because of the evil]
This premature removal of the
righteous seemed but an ill reward
for such faithful service ; and yet
it was dictated by mercy—as well
towards the godly as towards the

wicked. It delivered the former (1)
from the sights of horror which
‘vexed’ and might have polluted
their ‘righteous souls,’ comp. Wisd.
iv. 14, Dante, Purgat. xiv. 111-113,
and (2) from sharing in the retribu-
tive calamities impending over the
nation (comp. Gen. xv. 15, 2 Kings
xxii. 20). It warned the latter that
their wickedness was great to be so
punished (for even a few righteous
men can save a City, Gen. xviii. 23-
32), and that a still more severe
punishment was at the door. (Thus
‘evil’ has a double meaning.)—For
the Hebr. idiom, comp. x. 27, Jer.
xlii. 17, li. 64.2

2 The prophet continues in a
lyric strain. He entereth into
Peace] The grave, or rather the
Underworld, is here styled Peace,
as elsewhere Stillness (Ps. xciv. 17,
exv. 17). Comp. Job iii. 17. We
might also render ‘into a state of
peace’ (comp. on xlv. 16). There
is a contrast to the awful troubles
which the survivors have to en-
counter (Hengst.).——Upon their
beds] i.e., primarily their graves ;
comp. the Phcenician inscription
of King Eshmunazar (ed. Schlott-
mann, iv. 1 &c.), ‘the lid of this bed’
(i.e., sarcophagus) ; the word is the
same as here. See also Job xvii.
13 (a different word for bed), and
especially Ezek, xxxii. 25. The
phraseology of the latter passage
implies a popular notion of a du-
plicate grave in the Underworld,
corresponding to the double quasi-
consciousness of the dead body
and the soul or shade (respecting
this see note on Ixvi. 24). It
may be the ‘beds’ in the Under-
world to which the prophet refers,
and which (whatever the popular
belief was) he, at any rate, would
hardly make contingent on the
possession by these righteous con-
fessors of separate graves. Such

' Comp. Dr. Land’s discussion of this clause in Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1867,

Pp. 203.

To support the Isaianic authorship of this chapter Dr. Rutgers had rendered

‘before the calamity’ ; against this, Dr. Land refers to the above-mentioned passages,

7O ISATAIIL. (CHAP. LVII.
straight before him. *But as for you, approach hither, ye
sons of a sorceress ! seed of an adulterer ‘and of a harlot.4
4Of whom do ye make sport? Against whom do ye draw
a wide mouth, do ye make a long tongue? Are ye not
children of rebellion, a seed of falsehood? ° Ye who inflame
yourselves ° by the terebinths,° under every green tree; who

slay the children in the torrent-valleys under the rents of the

4 So Kr., Gr.—TExXT, and of her who committeth whoredom ; or, and thou who

(thyself) commiittest who edom.

© With gods, Sept., Pesh., Targ., Vulg., Vitr., Stier.

an honour was not always granted
to faithful prophets (Jer. xxvi. 23).
—Straight before him] A
phrase quite in the style of the
Book of Proverbs (comp. Prov. iv.
25-27).

3 Approach hither] viz., to hear
your sentence.——-Ye sons of a
sorceress i.e. having an
innate inclination (comp. Ps. li. 5)
to break the mystic marriage-tie
between Jehovah and his people.
Comp. Ezek. xvi. 44, 45, Matt. xii.
39; XVI. 4.

4 Of whom do ye make sport?

‘Who are they that ye
find a luxurious pleasure in tor-
menting? Men of whom “the
world is not worthy”! Judge if
ye are not yourselves fitter objects
of scorn.’ ‘Make sport’ is an un-
exampled rendering (see lv. 2, lvili.
14, Ixvi. 11), but is required by the
context.

+> We who inflame yourselves
F Referring to the orgiastic
cults in the sacred groves of Pales-
tinian heathenism ! (i. 29, Ezek. vi.
13). We must not, however, press
the details of the description which
follows too far ; there is an ‘adultery’
of the heart (see on 1. 21).—— Tere-
binths] Comp. Hos. iv. 13, ‘(They
sacrifice) under oaks and poplars
and terebinths, because the shade
thereof is good. For the rend.
see Noles and Criticisms, p. 38.

——Under every green tree]
A common formula in the later
books (see 1 Kings xiv. 23, 2 Kings
Xvi. 4, xvii. 10, Jer. ii. 20, iii. 6, 13,
Ezek. vi. 13), also once in the dis-
puted Book of Deuteronomy (xii.
2). ‘Who slay the children]
‘Slay’ here =‘sacrifice, as Ezek.
xvi, 21 (in a similar context).
In the torrent-valleys] The
dry channels of winter-torrents
(wadys), especially that of Hinnom,
were the scenes of the child-sacri-
fices to the cruel god Moloch (xxx.
33)? The wildness of. the land-
scape perhaps suited such stern
acts, and the action of the torrents
produced an abundance of large
rounded stones (such as are so often
in Ezekiel contemptuously called
gillilim, ‘lumps, i.e., shapeless
masses) for Moloch’s altars.—Con-
servative critics have with much
reason pointed out that the topogra-
phical references in this verse sug-
gest that the prophecy was written in
Palestine rather than in Babylonia.
“TI need scarcely say,’ observes Dr.
Payne Smith, ‘that as there are no
torrents, but only canals, in the flat
alluvial soil of Babylonia, so there
are no torrent-beds there, but that
these form a common feature of
the landscape in Palestine and all
mountainous countries.’$ See, how-
ever, note on xli. 19.

! See Graf von Baudissin, Studien sur semitischen Religionsgeschichte, Heft I1.,

A’ handlung 2.

? See Kalisch's Leviticus, i. 365-7, and comp. W. R. S. in Excycl, Brit., art.

‘ Moloch.’

3 Payne Smith, Prophecy a Preparition for Christ, p. 319; comp. Rutgers, De

ehtheid, enz. p. 9%

CHAP. LVI1.]

crags !

ISAIAH. 71

6 In the smooth stones of the valley are thy portion ;

they, they are thy lot ; even to them hast thou poured out

drink-offerings, offered meal-offerings.

self in spite of these things?

Should I quiet my-

7 Upon a mountain lofty and raised up hast thou placed
thy bed: even thither hast thou gone up to offer sacrifice.
8 And behind the door and the post hast thou placed thy

* The smooth stones] The
large smooth stones referred to
above were the fetishes of the pri-
mitive Semitic races, and anointed
with oil, according to a widely-
spread custom (comp. AdOou Aurapol,
lapides uncti, lubricati). It was
such a stone which Jacob took
for a pillow, and afterwards conse-
crated by pouring oil upon it (Gen.
xxviii. 11, 18). The early Semites
and reactionary, idolatrous Israel-
ites called such stones Bethels (Gai-
tudo, Barvdia, is the Phoenician
form of Bethel with a Greek termi-
nation), i.e., houses of El (the early
Semitic word for God) ; the ‘ Jeho-
vist’ in Gen. /. ¢. implies that Jacob
transferred the name from the
stone to the place where the Divine
being appeared to him. In spite
of the efforts of the ‘Jehovist,’ who
desired to convert these ancient
fetishes into memorials of patri-
archal history (comp. Gen. xxxi.
45-52), the old heathenish use of
them seems to have continued,
especially in secluded places (comp.
Kuenen’s fact-full appendix, Re-
ligion of Israel, i. 390-395).——
Thy portion] Here we begin to
meet with the 2nd pers. fem., Israel
being regarded as the bride of her
God, but at the same time as
having a right of property over
him (it is the idea of the ‘covenant’
under another form). With deep
irony, the speaker unfolds how
Israel has exchanged her property
in the Almighty for smooth, po-
lished blocks of stone. ‘ Portion,’
see Jer. x. 16, Ps. xvi. 5, Ixxiii.
26, cxix. 57, cxlii. 5 (in all these
passages the term is used of Jeho-

_ Kings xvi. 4, Hos. iv.

vah), and comp. Deut. xxix. 26 (25),
‘gods whom they had not known,
and whom he had not apportioned
unto them.’ Hast thou poured
out... Here begins a survey of
Jewish idolatry before the Exile.
—Should I quiet myself. . . ?]
It is an outbreak of Jehovah's

grieved love or ‘jealousy.’ Comp.
Jer. v. 2 (similar phrase in similar
context).

7 The heights as well as the
depths are profaned by debasing
rites; the country is ‘wholly given
to idolatry.’ Beware of taking the
description too literally. It is not
so much the licentious character of
some of the heathen rites which is
referred to, as the debased moral
and spiritual condition connected
with idolatry——wpon a moun-
tain] Shrines were erected by
preference upon hills; comp. 2
13, Jer. ii.
20, Ezek. vi. 13. The extent of
the ancient hill-religion may be es-
timated by the number of mazdrs
or tomb-houses, which surmount
almost every conspicuous hill in
Palestine. They are generally
shaded by a great tree, which,
like the azér itself, is held sacred ;
‘rags and threads hang from its
branches as votive offerings, and
the name of a saint or prophet is
often connected with the spot’?
Thy bed] Comp. Jer. iii. 2,
Ezek. xvi., xxili.

8 and behind the door... thy
memorial] The expressions are
dark. Most recent commentators
(except Ewald) take ‘memorial’ to
be the formula ‘Jehovah is our
God, Jehovah is one,’ which, ac-

1 Conder, Quarterly Statements of Palestine Exploration Fund, 1875, p. 39; Gau-
neau, La Palestine inconnue (Paris, 1876), pp. 49-52.

72 ISAIAIL. (CHAP. LVIL.
memorial, for apart from me hast thou uncovered, and gone
up; thou hast enlarged thy bed, and made a contract f with
them‘; thou hast loved their bed; *thou hast beheld the
phallus.¢ 9% And thou hast travelled to the king with oil, and
hast multiplied thy perfumes, and hast sent thy messengers
afar off, and humbled thyself even to Shed]. 1! With the
length of thy journey thou hast wearied thyself ; yet thou hast
not said, It is without result: thou didst get renewal of thy

£ So Gr. ; TEXT, from them.
® (Wherever) thou hast beheld an (idolatrous) monument, Vitr. —Thou hast chosen
a place, Pesh., Targ., Kimchi, Lowth, Ges.

h Refreshing sufficient for thee, La,, Klostermann, Gr,

cording to Deut. vi. 9, xi. 20, was to
be written on the posts of the house
and on the gates ; comp. the use of
‘memorial’ in Hos. xii. 5. Putting
this ‘memorial’ dehznd the door is
thought to have been a sign of
contempt. But surely this is very
doubtful : the new position of this
object would make it all the more
conspicuous to the inmates of the
house. Besides, is it quite certain
that the direction in Deuteronomy
was so carefully carried out, or even
perhaps intended to be literally
carried out? (I waive questions
of date.) It is safer to return to
the view of the Targum and of
Jerome, viz., that ‘memorial’ = idol
(or rather idolatrous symbol—the
phallus). So too Vitr., Lowth,
Ewald, Gratz (comparing the Hebr.
of Ezek. xvi. 17). Hast beheld
tue phallus] i.e., ‘didst look at it
with pleasure’ (see Del.’s note).
The first alt. rend. will bear the
same meaning (comp. ‘thy memo-
rial’ in the first verse-half).

®° and thou hast travelled to
the king] There is the same point
in dispute as in viii, 21, xxx, 23,
viz., whether ‘ king’ designates the
lieavenly or the earthly ruler. Dr.
Payne Smith (Bampton Lectures
for 1869, p. 323) would settle the
question by reading Pmdles, ‘to
Molech (or Moloch), but the
phrase ‘travelling to Molech’ has
no parallel, and a comparison of v.

11, where it is certainly the fear of
man which is rebuked, and of Ezek.
xxiii. 40, where we read of a mes-
senger being sent for men from
afar, favours the view that ‘king’
here means king of Assyria. It is
that coquetting with heathen powers
which is here, as so often elsewhere,
denounced. ——With oil] So Hos.
xii. 1 (2). Thy messengers afar
off] Comp. the negotiations with
Egypt denounced by Isaiah and
Hosea, the Assyrian alliance of
Ahaz, and the coalition formed by
Azariah against Tiglath-Pileser.!
Hast humbled thyself even
to Sheol] ‘No servility was too
great for thee.’ Sheol is here used
metaphorically, as in vii. 11 4 (see
note). A reference to the infernal
deities (Ew.) seems less appro-
priate.

10 with the length of thy jour-
ney]i.e., not merely ‘ with the long
journey to Assyria,’ but ‘with thy
ceaseless quest for help and protec-
tion,’ including of course embassies
to foreign kings, but also every
other specimen of untheocratic
policy.——1t is without result]
Lit., ‘itis desperate.’ Sept. mavoo-
pa. The word is the same as in
Jer. ii. 25, xviii, 12, but in a dif-
ferent context. Renewal of thy
strength] Vulg., ‘vitam mantis
tue.’ The Hebr. idiom is similar
to that in Gen. xviii. 10, 14, ‘when
this season liveth (again), ie, a

1 See Smith Assyrian Eponym Canon, pp. 117-8, Schrader, A. A. T7., pp. 217-223,
and especially the same wiiter's Aeédinschriften und Geschichtsforschung (Giessen,

1678), Pp. 395-421

CHAP. LVIL.]

ISAIAH.

ip

strength, therefore thou feltest not weak. "And at whom
hast thou been alarmed so as to fear, that thou hast played the
traitor, and me hast not remembered, neither hast taken it to
thy heart? Truly I have been silent, yea, ‘from of old,’ and

therefore thou fearest not me.

27 will make known * my

righteousness, and as for thy works—they cannot profit

{ Hiding (mine eyes), Sept., Vulg., some Hebr. MSS,, Lo., Kr. (omitting one

letter, and pointing differently).
k So Pesh., Lo., Weir.—Thy, Text.

year hence.——Thou feltest not
weak] Dathe (ap. Stier),‘non sen-
tis morbum tuum.’ So Jer. v. 3,
‘ Thou hast smitten them, and they
did not feel weak.’

ll and at whom hast thou been
alarmed ...] The verse is not
ironical, as De Dieu and others
(misled by the text-reading of v.
12 @), but contains a kindly remon-
strance (comp. li. 12, 13). ‘ Whois
there so strong and so terrible as to
justify thee in thy infidelity towards
Jehovah? No one. But is there
no excuse for the behaviour of the
Jews? There is, viz., Jehovah’s
long “silence” (comp. xlii. 14), the
cessation of his interpositions in
behalf of his people.’ This seems
to me the easiest way to explain
the connection, which is certainly
rather loose, between the two halves
of the verse. Jehovah admits,! in
other words, that the calamities of
the Israelites have increased their
alienation from him (comp. Ixiii.
17, Ixiv. 5). In the next verse he
announces that he will try a new
argument with these walkers ‘by
sight’ and not ‘by faith’—Ewald
thinks the prophet here resumes in
his own language, dropping that of
the more ancient writer to whom
he ascribes lvi. 9-lvii. 11 @ There
is at any rate a very noticeable
change in the prophet’s tone, which
all at once becomes soft and en-
couraging. Truly I have been
silent .. .] ‘Truly it is because
I have been silent, that thou ac-
cordest me no fear.’ Notice the
prominent position of ‘me’ in the

Hebrew, corresponding to the em-
phatic (because otherwise unneces-
sary) expression of the pronoun ‘I’
in this and the next verse. ‘ Truly,’
lit., ‘have not...’ (prefixed towhole
sentence as xxviil. 25). ‘I have
been silent, &c.; comp. xlii. 14
(note). The participial clause in
the Hebr. is causal.

2 J will make known... ]
Jehovah will try a fresh argument.
If ‘silence’ has taught no lessons,
the speech of mingled mercy and
judgment may work more effectu-
ally on the heart. Precisely so, in
xlvi. 13, the same Divine speaker
says to those who are ‘far from
righteousness,’ ‘I bring near my
righteousness.’ (Dr. Weir com-
pares Ps. xxii. 31, xcviii, 2.)—
Those who retain the text-reading
generally explain it as a piece of
irony—‘I will show thy righteous-
ness in its true colours—as “ filthy
rags”? (lxiv. 6, Auth. Vers.). I
doubt if this can be shown to suit
the context; in the next chapter,
which expressly deals with the
self-righteous, it might perhaps
pass, but the persons addressed
here are not even acknowledged
as worshippers of Jehovah. Add
to this, that the word rendered
‘will make known’ is constantly
used in II. Isaiah of the prophetic
revelation of the deliverance of
Israel. Rashi, Hitzig, and Knobel
avoid a part of the objections to the
text-reading by taking the words
literally—‘I will show thee how to
obtain righteousness,’ Rashi sup-
posing internal righteousness to be

1 Per questo la Scrittura condiscende | A vostra facultate, ecc, Dante, Paradzso, iv,

43) 44-

74

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. LVIL

thee. '§ When thou criest, let thy ! medley of gods ' deliver thee!
but the whole of them the wind shall carry off, a breath
shall take away, while he that taketh refuge in me shall
inherit the land, and take my holy mountain in possession.
4 And one said, Cast up, cast up, prepare the way ; take up
the stumbling-block out of the way of my people.

‘6 For thus saith the high and exalted One, who dwelleth
for ever, whose name is Holy One: I dwell in the high and

1 Abominations, Weir (emendation).

intended, the other two external
righteousness,’ i.e., deliverance,
success in the sight of men (comp.
liv. 17). But Rashi’s view pre-
supposes a misinterpretation of
‘thy works’ in the second verse-
half, while Hitzig’s and Knobel’s
is not quite suitable in this connec-
tion, for, as v. 13 shows, there must
be a great sifting of Israel before
Jehovah’s righteousness can _be-
come Israel’s. Even in liv. 17 (which
llitz., Knob. ought to have com-
pared), it is only of ‘the servants
of Jehovah’ that the phrase ‘their
righteousness,’ (i.e., their ‘outward
justification ’) is used, and it is im-
mediately qualified by the addition
‘(which is) of me..——Thy works]
i.e., thy idols (xli. 29, comp. i. 31).
They cannot profit thee] A
phrase specially belonging to idols
(see on xliv. 10).

18 when thou criest] Under
the rod of chastisement. The
speaker does not mean to empha-
size the terrors of the judgment,
but, assuming its near approach,
shows that no help but Jehovah’s
will be of any avail.——_Thy med-
ley of gods] Lit., thy collections.
‘The ideais not merely that of num-
ber (comp. Jer. ii. 28), but of variety.
Jehovah says ironically that the
Jews had set up a kind of Pantheon,
open to all religions. Comp. Mic.
i. 7, ‘she collected them (viz., the
idols) together out of the hire of a
harlot. The Hebr. is peculiar, but
not so peculiar as to necessitate Dr.
Weir’s ingenious correction.
Shall inherit the land] viz., Judah

(xlix. 8). The familiar promise at-
tached sometimes to fulfilment of
the Law (Deut. iv. 1, comp. 40, v.
33), sometimes to moral qualities,
such as humility (Ps. xxxvii. 11),
righteousness (Ps. xxxvii. 29), and,
as here, trust in Jehovah (Ps,
xxxvii. 9). Comp. lvi. 7.

And one said .. . ] Another
of those mysterious voices which
fill the air round about the prophet.
It conveys a summons to prepare
the way for the people of Jehovah
(comp. xl. 3, Ixii. 10), and to remove
the ‘stumbling-blocks’ which Jeho-
vah himself (Jer. vi. 21 Weir) had
placed in Israel’s path. Comp.
XXVL 7:

18 Here a new paragraph begins
—the concluding one of the sec-
tion. The ground of Israel’s hope
of salvation is the combined high-
ness and humbleness (avavah Ps.
xviii. 36) of Jehovah (comp. Ixvi. 2,
Ps. cxxxviii. 6). As an old Jewish
writer says, ‘Wherever the Scrip-
ture bears witness to the Divine
mightiness, it brings out side by
side with it the Divine humbleness,
e.g., Deut. x. 17, comp. 18; Isa.
Iviil. 15 a, comp. 15 4; Ps. Ixviii. 4,
5.1 Jehovah cannot direct the
affairs of his people from without ;
he desires to be enthroned in their
hearts. When they turn away
from him, he punishes them ; but
by gentle, spiritual means he moves
them to return to him as penitent
sinners.——Who dwelleth for
ever] i.e, the eternal, the un-
changeable (like ‘the First and the
Last,’ xliv. 6).——'Whose name is

1 Megilla, 3x «, quoted by Del. on Ps, xviii, 36.

CHAP, LVII.]

ISAIAH, 75

holy place, with him also that is crushed and lowly in spirit,
to revive the spirit of the lowly, and to revive the heart of those
who are crushed. -!6 For I will not contend for ever, nor will I
be wrathful continually, for the spirit would faint before me,

and the souls which J have made.

Holy One] i.e., who reveal myself
as the Holy One. See on xl. 25.——
The high and holy place]i.e., the
heavenly temple (vi. 1). ‘With
him also that is crushed... ]
‘With,’ i.e., in close proximity to.
The prophet implicitly contradicts
the Epicureans of his day, who de-
nied what the psalmist (above)
calls the ‘humbleness’ of God, and
said, ‘Is not God in the height of
heaven? how can he perceive?’
(Job xxii. 12, 13). ‘ Crushed, not
‘contrite’ (Auth. Vers. after Vulg.),
which is a misleading rendering.
‘Crushed in spirit’ is almost syno-
nymous with lowly, hills being the
emblem of pride, and level land
of humility ; it implies, in addition,
that the lowly state of mind has
been produced by affliction—in the
present case, the affliction of Zion ;
comp. Ixi. 1, 2, Ixv. 14, Ixvi. z, Ps.
xxxiv. 18 (19), cxlvii. 2, 3.

16 Jehovah is ‘a wise and faith-
ful Creator.’ For I will not
contend... | To ‘contend’=
to send adversity, to punish (as
xxvii. 8). The idea of this verse is
very characteristic of the tender-
hearted author ; see xlii. 3, and
comp. Ps. ciii. 9, -Ixxviii. 38, 39
(post-Exile psalms). The souls
which / have made] The expres-
sion is noteworthy, as implying the
separate personality of man (comp.
Zech. xii. 1, Jer. xxxvili. 16); the
Old Testament writers are not
always equally explicit (see Ps. civ.
29, Job xxxiv. 14). The choice of
the word for ‘soul’ (wéshamah, lit.,
‘breath ’) is itself significant ; it
means the principle of lite breathed
immediately by God into the human
body (Gen. ii. 7), the self-conscious
personal spirit.

For his unjust gain] Lit.,
for the iniquity of his gain.’ Del.
renders ‘for the guilt of his self-

For his unjust gain I

seeking,’ ie, for his desire for
worldly possessions. I doubt if we
have a right to introduce such a
paraphrase into the text; the more
so, as it is perhaps not strictly ac-
curate. The fact is, that ‘unjust
gain’ is used by the prophets and
psalmists, precisely in the same
way as ‘bloodshed, as a repre-
sentative of the besetting sins of
the Jews. Jeremiah, for instance,
says (vi. 13), ‘For from the least
unto the greatest of them every
one gaineth unjust gain’: else-
where (v. 1) he even denies that
there is a single man of probity
and justice left. Similarly, Ezekiel
says (xxxill. 31), ‘Their heart goeth
after their unjust gain,’ and the
typical righteous man in Ps. cxix.
(v. 36) prays, ‘Incline my heart to
thy testimonies and not to unjust
gain,’ and the very prophecy before
us singles out the passion for money
as the chief sin of the spiritual
shepherds of the Jews. It is just
the same with the sin of murder
(including doubtless judicial mur-
der), which is laid at the door of
the Jews with a really surprising
persistency ; comp. i. 15, v. 7,
xxxiil. 15, lix. 3, Jer. ii. 34, Ezek.
vii. 23, Hos. iv. 2, Mic. iii. 10, vii.
2, Prov.i.11. We are, therefore,
abundantly justified in supposing
that where a prophet or a psalmist
seems to lay a disproportionate
emphasis on a single sin, such as
murder or unjust gain, he means to
include all the other besetting sins
of the Jews under this head, espe-
cially, of course, those sins of vio-
lence, to which the upper classes
(chiefly addressed by the prophets)
were peculiarly prone Only thus
can we understand a passage like
the present, which seems to ascribe
the Exile to simple ‘covetousness,’
and like Ps. li. 14, where the typical

76 ISAIAH. [CHAP. LVIL
was wrathful and smote him ; I hid my face, and was wrath-
ful, because he went on perversely in the way of his own
heart. '§ His ways have I seen, ™ and I will heal him ; and I
will lead him, and give a requital of comfort to him and to his
mournful ones. !9"He createth" the fruit of the lips ; ‘ Peace,
peace to the far off and to the near,’ saith Jehovah, ‘for I

will heal him. But the ungodly are like the sea that is

m But, Ges., Naeg.

. So Kay.—I create, Rashi, Kimchi, Calv., Vitr.—I have created, Vulg.—He who
createth, Naeg. ; or, created, Ew. —Creating, Sept., Ges., Hitz., Del.—I who created,
Targ. (connected with v. 18; so also Ges.),

Israelite, who makes no other in- and that Israel, having been

dividualising reference, and else-
where lays the chief stress on his
sinful nature, prays, ‘ Deliver me
from (the guilt of) bloodshed .. .
and my tongue shall sing aloud
of thy righteousness.’ I may add,
that there is perhaps a special
reason here for the selection of
‘unjust gain’ as a representative
sin in the Divine law of the corre-
spondence of punishment to guilt.
Land being the object of a high-
born Jew’s covetousness, expulsion
from his land was to be his punish-
ment ; see v. 8, 9, Jer. vi. 12, 13.

18 His ways have I seen] Je-
hovah has seen the thorny ways in
which His people has been wander-
ing ; He will heal his wounds (xxx.
26), and guide him by an easier
path (lviii. 11), or, as Ew., ‘I have
seen the amendment of his ways.’
A requital of comfort] Asa
compensation for his long suffer-
ings (comp. on xl. 2)——And to
his mournful ones] (‘And’=
namely.) So Ixi. 2, 3; comp. the
fuller phrase in Ixvi. Io.

19 He createth... ] It is anex-
clamation of the prophet (Kay) ; a
participial clause, as in xl. 22, 23.
—— The fruit of the lips] This
may mean (1) praise and thanks-
giving (as Ges., Ew., Del., Kay) ;
comp. Hos. xiv. 2, Heb. xiii.15. On
this view of the passage, it contains
a second argument (the first being
drawn from Jehovah’s mercifulness)
for the ‘healing’ or restoration of
Israel, viz., that praise is one of
God’s ‘creations’ or appointments,

‘formed’ to ‘tell out His praise?
(xliii. 21), must not be hindered
from his mission. Or (2) with Je-
rome, the Rabbis, Calv., Hitz,
Henderson, we may take ‘the fruit
of the lips’ to refer to the word of
Jehovah which follows. In any
case it is not ordinary speech
which is thus described, but some
happy and happy-making commu-
nication, worthy to be called a
‘fruit’? (as in Prov. x. 31), comp.
Mohammed’s saying of the garden
of Eden, ‘No vain discourse shall
they hear therein, but only “peace”
(Kordn, Sur. xix. 63). But the
first way is surely the preferable
one. Hitherto the lips of faithful
Israelites (‘his mournful ones’) have
been sealed by sorrow ; now Je-
hovah, by his creative word, causes
them to blossom with praise.
Peace, peace] i.e., perfect peace
(as xxvi. 3). To the far off and
to the near] i.e., either ‘to the
Gentile and to the Jew’ (Stier,
Naeg., after Eph. il. 17, comp. xlii.
6), or, which suits the context
better, ‘to him who is far from Je-
rusalem and to him who is near to
it’ (Kimchi, Calv., Ew., Del.), see
Dan. ix. 7, and comp. xlili. 5-7,
xlix. 12. No degree of remoteness
was to disqualify true Israelites for
the enjoyment of the promise.

20,21 A moving contrast. The
ungodly] those who are, whether
only inwardly or also outwardly, in
a state of alienation from Jehovah,
shall never ‘enter into peace.’ Comp.
Jer. xlix. 23 (Q.7.B.), Jude 13, ‘wild

CHAP. LVIII.]

ISAIAH.

ii

°tost up,° for it cannot rest, and its waters toss up mire

and mud.
godly,

© Lit, driven. See crit. note.

There is no peace, saith ? my God,? to the un-

P Jehovah, many Hebr. MSS.—God, Sept. (Vatican MS.), Targ.—Jehovah my
God, a very few Hebr. MSS.—The Lord [Jehovah] Elohim, Sept. (Alex. MS.), Vulg.

waves of the sea, foaming out their
ownshame.’ This closing sentence
of the second portion of prophecy
agrees with xlviii. 22, except that
‘my God’ (comp. vii. 13) is substi-
tuted for ‘Jehovah,’ as if the speaker

would thus put his seal to the
Divine oracle. The phrase is self-
assertive; the prophet magnifies
his office. Jehovah zs in a special
sense the God of ‘his servants the
prophets’ (Am. iii. 7).

CHAPTER LVIII.

THE Jewish nation is first rebuked for its formal religion, and especially
for its unspiritual mode of fasting, which deprives its prayers for deliver-
ance of all efficacy (vv. 1-4) ; after this, the true mode of fasting is held
up for imitation (vv. 5-12) ; and finally, the duty of Sabbath-observance
is inculcated, and a promise of ‘ inheriting the land’ attached to it. The
practical tone here adopted reminds us of lvi. 1-8 (see introduction there).
The priests are not referred to ; only the laity—a point in which this
prophecy contrasts with the undoubted prophecies of Isaiah. The
Levitical code seems to be also presupposed, at any rate in some form
(see on v. 3), though I would not go so far as Michael Sachs and D.
Hoffmann, and regard the prophecy as a discourse delivered on the Day
of Atonement.!

' Call with the throat, hold not back ; like a trumpet raise
thy voice, and declare unto my people their rebellion, and
unto the house of Jacob their sins. * And (yet) me they con-

1 Call with the throat] Not not mentioned in this homily ; the

merely with the lips, ie, softly
(1 Sam. i. 13), but ‘a plein gosier,’
as Calvin puts it. Comp. Ps. cxlix.
16, ‘Lofty hymns divine in their
throat.’ Like a trumpet] or,
‘like the trumpet,’ viz., that of Ju-
bilee, which had perhaps just re-
sounded. So D. Hoffmann, but
unnecessarily. Declare unto
my people ... ] A reminiscence
of Mic. iii. 8. Obs., the priests are

laity alone are addressed.

? and (yet)... J] Rebellious
and sinful as they are. Or else
understand, ‘For they deem them-
selves to be righteous,’ and continue
‘and (=consequently) they consult
me, &c.—Me they consult]
‘Me’ is put emphatically at the be-
ginning of the verse—‘ me, the All-
holy and the Ali-just.? ‘ Consult’
is the usual word for applying to

1 Hoffmann in particular uses this chapter as evidence of Isaiah’s authorship.
But all that it could be held to prove, from his point of view, would be that the Jews
then lived in their own land; whether in Isaiah's, in Jeremiah’s, or in Ezia’s time
would be still undetermined. See Sachs, Kerem Chemed, vii. 124, &c. ; Hoffmann,
in Berliner's AZagazin, 1876, pp. 5, 6.

78 ISAIAH.

(CHAP. LVIII.

sult daily, and to know my ways they desire: as a nation that
hath done righteousness, and hath not forsaken the law of
its God, they ask of me judgments of righteousness, * the

approach of God they desire.*

3 Wherefore have we fasted,

and thou seest not—humbled our soul, and thou takest no

notice ?
your tasks ye exact.”

Behold, in your fasting ye pursue business, and all
“ Behold, it is for strife and conten-

® So most moderns.—In approaching to God they delight, Sept., Pesh., Targ.,

Vulg., Calv., Vitr , Kay.

> So Ges. (Thesaurus), Hitz., Naeg., Weir.—Workmen ye drive, Ges. (Commen-

tary), Ew., Del.

an oracle or a prophet, and no doubt
consultations of the prophet are in-
cluded (see Ezek. xx. 1), but direct
prayer to God is also meant (see v.
4 and comp. lv. 6).—M™y ways]
i.e, my dealings with my people.
—The law] Hebr. m/s/pat (see
on xiii 1). Judgments of
righteousness] i.e., manifestations
in act of Jehovah’s fidelity to his
covenant-engagements with Israel.
Comp. on lix. 9. The approach
of God] i.e., his approach to judg-
ment. Alt. rend. spoils the paral-
lelism.

3 wherefore have we fasted]
The reproofs in this part of the
prophecy remind us of Zech. vii. 5,
6 (comp. viii. 19), Joel ii. 12, 13.
Fasting, both public and private,
appears to have become more and
more prevalent in and after the
Babylonian period; the passage be-
fore us may refer equally to special
private fasts and to those required
by the ecclesiastical authorities
(comp. Matt. ix. 14, Luke xviii. 12).
The effect of the prophetic exhorta-
tions was peculiar (see on v. 7) ; it
was not till after the last siege of Je-
rusalem that the evil of formal fast-
ing began to be at all generally felt.
That great calamity, however, did
open the eyes of the Jewish people.
The short homily on the fasting
of the heart, which, according to
Taanith, ii. 1, was pronounced at
public fasts, is quite in the spirit of
the prophetic exhortations ; comp.
also quotations from Talmud (/Ve-
darim babli, p. 10 a, Kiddushin
Jerush., end), in Gratz’s Kohélet,

PP. 33, 34. Humbled our soul]
A characteristic phrase of the Le-
vitica! legislation, which almost (I
must not say ‘entirely, for in Ps.
Xxxv. 13, the two forms of expres-
sion are combined) supplanted the
word ‘to fast ;’ see Lev. xvi. 29, 31,
xxiii. 27, 32, Num. xxix. 7, xxx. 13.
It was evidently a_ well-known
technical phrase when our prophet
wrote, for in v. 5 he uses it as such,
simply deepening its meaning.
Ye pursue business] (The rend.
‘business’ seems absolutely neces-
sary here, as also in Ecclesiastes,
where Sept. renders mpadypa. It is
doubtful, however, in spite of Ges.,
whether this meaning can be es-
tablished elsewhere.) Unlike the
Sabbath, the fast-days (except the
great Day of Atonement) appear
not to have involved the cessation
of business. Hence the prophet
continues, All your tasks ye ex-
act] Ye are specially anxious at
such times that the service of God
should not interfere with that of
mammon. Ye ‘exact’ the full tale
of works, like slave-drivers (the
participle of the verb has this
meaning, see Ex. v. 6, Job iii. 18).
‘The prophet paints throughout
from the life,’ observes Delitzsch
in his first edition, ‘and we cannot —
be persuaded by Stier’s false zeal
for Isaiah’s authorship to give up
the opinion that we have here a
figure drawn from the experience
of the exiles in Babylon. That
the prophet paints from the life is
certain, but no more than this.

‘ Behold, it is for strife... ]

CHAP. LVIII.] ISAIAH. 79

tion ye fast, and to smite with the fist of wickedness: ye do
not so fast at this time as to make your voice to be heard in
the height. °®Can such be the fast that I choose, the day
when a man humbleth his soul? Is it to bow down one’s
head like a bulrush, and to make sackcloth and ashes his
couch? Wilt thou call this a fast, and a day acceptable to
Jehovah? ‘Is not this the fast that I choose—to loose the
bands of wickedness, to untie the thongs of the yoke, and
to set them that are crushed at liberty, and that ye burst in
sunder every yoke? ‘Is it not to break thy bread to the hungry,
and that thou bring miserable outcasts to their home? When
thou seest the naked, that thou cover him, and hide not thy-
self from thine own flesh? ® Then shall thy light break forth
as the morning, thy new flesh shall quickly shoot forth, and
thy righteousness shall go before thee, and the glory of Jeho-

The only result of this formal fast-
ing is strife and violence. Ye
do not so fast . . . ] This glaring
inconsistency prevents your prayers
for a Divine interposition (v. 2)
from rising to the pure ‘height,’
where Jehovah dwelleth (Ivii. 15
Hebr.). Comp. Lam. iii. 44, ‘Thou
hast covered thyself with clouds, so
that prayer may not pass through.’
‘When a man humbleth his
soul] viz., according to the inten-
tion of the legislator——ike a
bulrush] ‘ With a merely physical
inclination of the head’ (Kay).
Wilt thou call] From this point
the prophet addresses personified
Israel (see v. 14).

6 To untie the thongs of the
yoke] Metaphorically, of course.
The elaborate and merciful legisla-
tion for the protection of Hebrew
slaves (found in Ex. xxi. 2 &c.,
Deut. xv. 12 &c., no less than
in Lev. xxv. 39 &c.) appears to
have been long a dead letter (see
Jer. xxxiv. 8-22)—a warning, be it
observed, not to attach too much
importance to the argumentum e
silentio with regard to the date of
Hebrew laws.—As to the Jewish
yoke, see Del.’snote on x. 27. To
set them that are crushed... ] In
the spirit of him who cherishes the
‘crushed reed’ (xlii. 3, same word).

7 The same duties are enforced
by the great Exile-prophet Ezekiel
(xviii. 7, 16). These and similar
exhortations seem to have had
great effect in the post-Exile
period; in fact, a new formalism
appears to have arisen out of
them (Matt. vi. 1-4). Comp. the
Sept. rendering of i. 27 4, and the
Rabbinic use of ‘righteousness’
(¢‘dakah) for alms-giving—a fore-
announcement of which is found as
early as Dan. iv. 27, ‘redeem thy
sins by beneficence’ (lit., ‘righteous-
ness,’ see Q. P. B.). To break
thy bread] Alluding to the oval
cakes which formed the Jewish
bread.— Miserable outcasts]
Referring probably to Jews in
foreign slavery ; comp. Joel iii. 2-
8, and especially Neh. v. 8—— To
their home] i.e., to their native
land (as xiv. 17).—Hide not
thyself]=tum not coldly away
(Deut. xxii. 1). Thine own
flesh] not merely thine own kindred
(Gen. xxix. 14, xxxvii. 27), but, more
broadly, thine own countrymen ;
see the close parallel in Neh. v. 5.

8-14 A series of glorious pro-
mises to the obedient.—— Thy
righteousness] i.e., thy justifica-
tion in the eyes of all the world
(liv. 17); or, perhaps more suitably,
thy inward, personal righteousness

80 ISAIAH. (CHAP.. LVIIL.:

vah shall be thy rearward. ® Then shalt thou call, and Jehovah
shall answer; thou shalt cry, and he shall say, Here I am.
If thou remove from the midst of thee the yoke, the stretching
out of the finger, and speaking wickedness, and minister thy
sustenance to the hungry, and satisfy the humbled soul ; then
shall thy light rise in darkness, and thy thick darkness be as
the noon, '!and Jehovah shall lead thee continually, and
satisfy thy soul in dry places, and thy bones shall he make
supple; and thou shalt be like a well-watered garden, and
like a fountain whose waters disappoint not. 'And © thy
children shall build up* the ancient ruins; thou shalt raise
up the foundations of past generations, and men shall call
thee Repairer of the breach, Restorer of roads for habi-
tation.

© So Weir (emendation).—Through thee shall be built up, Sept., Vulg., Ew.,
Bottcher (so too zonnulli, mentioned by Calvin).—(They that shall spring) from thee

shall build up, Hebr. text, according to most.

(i. 27, xxxiii. 5, 6).——The glory of

Jehovah .. ] Almost word for
word as in lii. 12.
®° Phen shalt thou call... ]

A contrast to the unacceptable and
unanswered prayers of the past
(uv. 2, 4). The stretching out
of the finger] The middle finger,
the ‘infamis digitus,’ Pers. ii. 33.
The objects of contempt are not
mentioned, but can be easily sup-
plied from the context. I doubt if
we have a right to compare lvii. 4,
Ixvi. 5 :—there is no mention in this
chapter of a party entirely hostile
to belief in Jehovah.— Speaking
wickedness] or ‘naughtiness’ (a
more complete equivalent), i.e., as
the context shows, plotting evil
against others.

10 And minister thy suste-
nance... ] Surely not ‘thy dain-
ties’ (as Knob.). The noun lite-
rally means ‘thy soul,’ i.e., that in
which thy life consisteth (Deut.
xxiv. 6), not ‘dainties,’ but bread.
(This verse shows how unsafe is
the common argument that such
and such a Hebrew word must
have a particular meaning, because
it has this meaning somewhere else
inthesame section. Here is ‘soul’

used in two senses close together.]
—The humbled soul] ‘Hum-
bled,’ not by formal fasting, but by
misery.

11 Shall lead thee continually
For it was not enough to be guide’
(or to have been guided) back to
Palestine: see on xl. I1.——%n
dry places] The Messianic age
seems to have receded for a time
into the dim distance. There are
still ‘dry places’ to apprehend, but
a foretaste of the expected blessings
shall be granted to the faithful
Like a well-watered garden] So
Jer. xxxi. 12 (nowhere else) ; for the
idea, comp. xliv. 3, 4.

Shall build up . . . } Closely
parallel with Ixi. 4. The ancient
ruins] Lit., the ruins of an zon
(‘olam), referring to the long
period of the Exile (comp. on xlil.
14).——The breach ]i.e., the broken
down walls. Roads for habita-
tion] We should have expected
‘roads for travelling,’ but Job xxiv.
13 proves that ‘to inhabit roads’
is an idiomatic Hebrew phrase. It
seems to have come from a time
when a large part of the country
was uninhabitable, because devoid
of roads,

CHAP. LIX.] ISAIAH. 81

Tf thou turn thy foot from the Sabbath, so as not to do
thy business on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight,
the holy thing of Jehovah honourable, and honour it, so as
not to do after thy wont, nor pursue thy business, nor speak
words ; then shalt thou delight thyself in Jehovah, and I
will make thee to ride over the heights of the land, and to eat
the inheritance of Jacob thy father ; for the mouth of Jehovah

hath spoken it.

18,14 The prophet evidently re-
gards the fast-days as mere forms
without authority or significance.
All the more strict is his view of
the claims of the Sabbath (comp.
Ivi. 1-8). Turn thy foot from
the Sabbath] As if it were holy
ground (Ex. ili. 5). A delight]
The delight would consist partly in
sympathy with the tired labourers,
enjoying their weekly rest (Sabbath
means ‘rest’). The prophet is far
from anticipating the Sabbath-law
of later times, which was no ‘de-
light” He would be more in sym-
pathy with an explanation of the
Assyrian sada¢tu, found in a list of
synonyms—‘ day of rest of heart’
(umi nuh libb1).——Thy wont] Lit.,
thy ways, i.e., thy wonted round of
occupations. Nor speak words]
Not that either now or at any later
time absolute silence was a part of
the unwritten Sabbath-law (see
Del.’s note), but that ‘in the mul-
titude of words there wanteth not

transgression’ (Prov. x. 19, Comp.
Eccles. v. 3). So ‘a man of
tongue’=a malicious speaker, Ps.
exl. 11 (comp. v. 9 above). The
phrase will also cover false or un-
founded statements (Hos. x. 4, Job
xv. 13?), ‘words of the lips’ (xxxvi.
5). Observe the emphasis laid on
words, both human and divine, as
well in the Old as in the New Test.
(comp. on ix. 8).

4 Phen shalt thou delight thy-
self ..] The condition being,
‘Tf thou call the Sabbath a delight,
we should expect the apodosis to
run, ‘Then shall Jehovah delight
himself in thee,’ and this is evi-
dently the meaning. To ride
over... ] i.e., to take triumphal
possession of Palestine with its
hills and fortresses (Deut. xxxii. 13,
comp. xxxili. 29). Comp. for the
idea Ixv. 9; also Ezek. xxxiv. 13, 14,
xxxvi. I-12 (obs. Ezekiel’s passion
for ‘the mountains of Israel’).

CHAPTER LIX.

Contents.—This chapter continues the subject of chap. lviii. With all its
observance of the outward forms of religion, the prophet’s contemporaries
(unless we suppose his point of view to be ideal, that is, prophetically
imaginative, and not historical) are guilty of open violations of the moral
law (vv. 1-8). But soon the prophet assumes that his admonitions have
borne fruit. The Jews penitently confess their sins, and their breach of
the covenant with Jehovah ; they lament their unhappy state, and own
that they have no claim upon their God for assistance (vv.9-15 a). Then
follows a splendid theophany. As there is no other champion, Jehovah
interposes. The last verse communicates a special word of promise to
the true Israel—The first part of the chapter presents affinities to

VOL. II. G

82

ISAIAH. [CHAP. LIX.

Proverbs (see especially on vv. 7, 8), and to Ps. Iviii. (see Kay, The Book
of Psalms, p. 181).

1 Behold, the hand of Jehovah is not too short to deliver,
nor his ear too heavy to hear ; ? but your iniquities have been
separating between you and your God, and your sins have
hidden the Face from you, so that he heareth not. For your
hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity ;
your lips speak lies, and your tongue muttereth depravity.
‘None *preferreth his suit* with truthfulness, and none
pleadeth with honesty ; they trust in chaos, and speak empti-
ness ; they conceive trouble, and bring forth iniquity. * Eggs
of the great viper do they hatch, and spiders’ webs do they

® Similarly Lowth, Ges., Knob., Naeg., Weir.—Speaketh in public, Hitz., Ew.,

Del.

1 The prophet meets some im-
plied objections of the Jews,——

The hand of Jehovah... ]
Comp. |. 2, Num. xi. 23.
? Your iniquities ... ] ‘Fora

long time past your acts have been
belying your professions, and pre-
cluding an answer to your prayers’
(lviii. 2-4).——-Have hidden the
Face ...] ‘The Face’ means
much the same as ‘the Name of
Jehovah,’ i.e., the self-manifesting
side of the Divine nature (see on
Ixiii. 9, i. 12, xl. 10). Notice the
absence both of article and of
suffix (in the Hebrew). ‘Face’
(panim) has almost become a
proper name. *

3 your hands] ‘ The very hands
ye stretch out in prayer, i, 15’ (Dr.
Weir). Are defiled with blood]
On this accusation, the strangeness
of which is only not felt because
of its frequency, see notes on i. I5,
lvii. 17. I entirely coincide with
Dr. Weir, that ‘the description in
this and the following verses can
scarcely [cannot possibly] apply to
Israel in exile.’

4 Wone preferreth his suit] In
vv. 1-3 grace was seeking and
pleading; hence the second per-
son, At this point the remonstrance

passes into a denunciation—The
sense ‘to prefer a suit’ (=z2 jus
vocare, kadeiv emt Siknv) is justified
by Job ix, 16, xiii. 22; it accords
well with vv. 14, 15. Dr. Weir
remarks, ‘Perhaps g67é is here the
person who appeals to the judge
for vindication and assistance. If
so, he will be go7é in relation to the
judge, zishpat in relation to his
adversary. A different view was
taken in J. C. A. p. 210.——They
trust in chaos] The basis of
society (if it can be said to have
one) is, not faith in God and good-
ness, but falsehood and deceit, in
other words, a lifeless, unproduc-
tive chaos (see on xl. 17).—
Emptiness] That which has no
moral content.—— Conceive trou-
ble... ] The same image in
Job xv. 35, Ps. vii. 14 (15); comp.
Isa. xxxill. II.

5 Eges of the great viper do
they hatch] The large yellow
viper is perhaps thought of (xi. 8).
They brood over purposes as deadly
as such vipers’ eggs (comp. Job
xx. 14, 16), as ingeniously malicious
as spiders’ webs (contrast Job viii.
14). He that eateth... |
When any of their plans are op-
posed, they take a cunning and

1 The only other passages in which Azs/zr (‘to hide’) and panzm (‘face’) without a

suffix occur together are, according to Dr. Weir, liii. 3, Job xxxiv. 29.

In the former

passage there is no occasion for a suffix; in the latter, it is ‘the Face’ of Jehovah, as

here, which is spoken of.

CHAP. LIX.] ISAIAII. 83
weave ; he that eateth of their eggs will die, and, if one be
crushed, it breaketh out into a viper. © Their webs will not
serve for clothing, neither can men cover themselves with
their works ; their works are works of mischief, and the deed
of violence is in their hands. 7 Their feet run to evil, and
make haste to shed innocent blood; their thoughts are
thoughts of iniquity ; desolation and destruction are in their
highways. ®The way of peace they know not, and there is
no justice in their tracks ; their paths they have made for

themselves crooked ; whosoever treadeth thereon knoweth

not peace,

® Therefore hath justice been far from us, and righteous-
ness doth not overtake us ; we wait for light, but behold dark-

a cruel revenge. For the mixture
of images in the last clause, comp.
Deut. xxxii. 32, 33.

6,7 They are not always content
with subtle schemes for the ruin of
their neighbours: coarser ‘webs’
—deeds of violence and blood—
are equally congenial to them.
Their feet run ., . in their
highways] The first half of the
verse, with the omission of ‘in-
nocent,’ occurs again as Prov. i. 16
(a verse wanting in Sept.); the
second reminds us of Prov. xvi. 17,
‘The highway of the upright is to
avoid evil’ (le. he bestows as
much care on avoiding evil as the
pioneer does on constructing a
road). These demoralised Jews,
however, build up their highways
with ‘desolation and destruction’
(an assonance in the original).

8 Note the four words for ‘ way’
in this and the preceding verse,
all found in the Book of Proverbs.
In vw. 7 we have the laboriously
constructed ‘highway’: in v. 8,
first, the most general word for
‘way, next, the waggon-track, and
lastly, the path made by the con-
stant treading of wayfarers. For
themselves] i.e., in their interest.
Crooked] reminds us of Prov.
x. 9, xxviii. 18, ii. 15. —-Knoweth
not peace] Note the suggestive
variation on the opening clause of
the verse.

9-15 ¢ Here the prophet speaks in

the name of his penitent people.
Contrast the self-righteous language
of lviii. 3——Therefore] i.e., be-
cause of our sins; not because
Jehovah cannot or will not help us
(comp. vw. 12). Hath justice
been far from us] ‘Justice’ or
‘judgment ’—either rendering is
admissible. ‘Judgment’ would
mean a judicial interposition of
Jehovah on behalf of his people ;
this would suit the immediate con-
text, including v. 11, but would not
fitv. 14, and hardly vw. 15. Jus-
tice’ or ‘right’ will suit all the
passages ; only we must distin-
guish (with Naeg.) between theo-
cratic and civil ‘justice.’ The
theocratic covenant entitled Israel
to expect the help of Jehovah in
time of need. Israel, however,
complained (as xl. 27), or at least
lamented (as here), that its ‘right’
was withheld, and the claims of
‘justice’ disallowed. There is no
essential difference between the
two renderings; it is on account
of v. 15 that I prefer ‘justice.’ In
v.14 it is of course civil ‘justice’
which is meant ; it is implied that
the absence of theocratic is con-
ditioned by that of civil ‘justice.
The former is called, in the parallel
line, ‘righteousness,’ still alluding
to the covenant between Jehovah
and Israel.—Knobel suggests that
the despondency of the Jews may
have arisen from Cyrus’s temporary
G2

ISAIAI. (CHAP. LIx.

84
ness, for gleams of light, but we walk in thick darkness,
'© We grope like blind men along the wall; and as eyeless
men we grope; we have stumbled at noonday as in the
twilight ; amidst © those full of life (?)> as dead men. "™ We
growl, all of us, like bears, and mourn sore like doves; we
wait for justice, but there is none, for deliverance, but it is far
from us. |For our rebellions are manifold before thee, and
our sins each testify against us ; for our rebellions are with us,
and as for our iniquities, we know them,—" treason and un.
faithfulness to Jehovah, and drawing back from after our
God, speaking ‘perverseness and transgression, conceiving
and uttering from the heart lying words. ' And justice hath

> So Ew., Del., Naeg.—Dark places, Targ., Vulg.., D. Kimchi, Rédiger, Knob.
© So Graetz (see on xxx. 12),—Oppression, TExT.

transference of the seat of war
from Babylonia to Asia Minor (he
quotes Xen. Cyvof. vi. 2, 9, Justin
i. 7): and Delitzsch too thinks that
this is conceivably right. I doubt
it greatly: it is Jehovah, and not
Cyrus, or any human champion, of
whom the Jews here complain. All
that is certain is that the prophet
is painting from the life; it is no
rhetorical phrasemonger that we
have before us. But the historical
reference of the section is wrapt in
obscurity.

10 We grope like blind men
... |] Comp. Deut. xxviii, 29: it
is not clear at first sight which pas-
sage is the original, and which the
imitation. Amidst those full of
life] On Knobel’s theory, this will
refer to the arrogance of the Baby-
lonians, who, according to the story,
ventured to hold a revel at the
very height of the siege of Babylon.
But reading, rendering, and inter-
pretation are perhaps all rather
doubtful.

'! Like bears... like doves]
The ‘dove’ is a well-known symbol
of lamentation (comp. xxxvili. 14,
Ezek. vii. 16, Nah. ii. 7) ; Horace
and Ovid (quoted by Bochart), but
no other Biblical writer, speak of
the bear as ‘groaning’ (gemere,
gemitus),

12 Before thee] implying that
they are well known to Jehovah ;

comp. Ps. xc. 8, Prov. xv. 11.——
‘With us] i.e., in our consciousness ;
so,in the Hebr., Job xii. 3 (eth),
xv. 9 (‘2772).

A threefold description of
apostasy opens the verse——
Treason(lit., ‘diruptio’ sc. feederis),
unfaithfulness (lit., ‘ belying,’ ie.,
atheism, Jer. v. 12), and drawing
back (i.e., the overt act of apos-
tasy). Evidently the prophet refers
to a paganising movement of special
intensity, of which we would gladly
have received more ample informa-
tion—Then follow sins of the lips
(comp. on vi. S$). Transgres-
sion] Lit. ‘deviation’ (Hebr.
sarah). Naeg. remarks that this
phrase (‘speaking deviation’) is
elsewhere used only of the false
teachingof‘ pseudo-prophets’ (Deut.
xili. 5 = Hebr. 6, Jer. xxviii. 16, xxix.
32), and that the writer is probably
alluding to the seductive discourses
of such persons. This is possible
indeed, but far from certain, as
sins of the lips are ascribed to the
whole nation in v. 3, and ‘devia-
tion’ from moral and_ spiritual
truth was not peculiar to prophets
(comp. i. 5. Hebr.).

14 The confession passes on to
public sins, especially the crying
Jewish sin of injustice. —— Justice
hath been driven back] If this
passage refers to the Babylonian
exiles (which is in my opinion very

CHAP. LIX.]

ISAIAH.

85

been driven back, and righteousness standeth afar off; for
truth hath stumbled in the broad place, and rectitude cannot
enter; and truth hath been left behind, and he that avoid-

eth evil, maketh himself a prey.

doubtful), it supplies a valuable
confirmation of the continuance of
Jewish institutions during the Cap-
tivity (comp. Ezek. viii. 1, &c). —
Hath stumbled in the broad
place] ‘ Broad places’ was a name
specially given to the recesses on
each side of the city-gate ‘ used as
places of assembly during the day,
and as places of rest for guests
[say rather for strangers, Judg. xix.
20] during the night.’ ! Here, during
the continuance of the Jewish state,
the ‘elders’ and ‘princes’ sat and
judged (comp. Jer. v. 1, Zech. viii.
16, 2 Chron. xxxii. 6). The question
cannot be avoided, Has the pro-
phetin view the circumstances of
the pre-Exile period ? or may we
venture to conjecture that the Baby-
lonian cities, like those of medizeval
Europe, contained separate ‘Jew-
ries’ or Jewish quarters, each with
its own ‘broad place’ or ‘forum’?
For truth... ] Justice has
perished, because truth and recti-
tude, its essential presuppositions,
have previously been overthrown.
——Cannot enter] i.e., cannot find
admittance to the tribunal, to give
evidence for the right—Hath
been left behind] Or (for the
phrase leaves it open whether the
absence spoken of is self-caused
or due to others), ‘hath become an
absentee’—‘terras Astraea religuit.
-——Maketh himself a prey| So
excellently Auth. Vers. ; ‘muss Je-
dermanns Raub sein,’ Luther. The
word sums up vv. 3-7. Comp. Ps.
Ixxvi. 6 a (same verb in Hebr.).

15 6 Here a new verse ought to
begin. This mistake of our present
arrangement of the verses is spe-
cially unfortunate, as the words
which follow evidently introduce a
new stanza or. strophe of the pro-
phecy. For other instances of
faulty and confusing verse-divisions,

see i. 16; Ixiii. 19, Hebr.: Ixvi. 3 ;
Gen. xlix. 24 ; 1 Kings ii. 46—11i.
1; iii.4, 5; Jer. ii. 23; Neh. vii.
735 xii. 23. And Jehovah
saw it... ] But had not Je-
hovah seen it from the first? Yes
(comp. xviii. 4, Ps. x. 14); but
he had not shown this in act. It
was Israel’s penitent confession
which drew forth the Divine love-
tokens. It was a genuine ‘fast’
(contrast lviii. 2-4), ‘a rending of
the heart and not [merely] the gar-
ments’ (Joel ii. 13), the germs of w
new life.—The tenses in vv. 15 6-
17 are at first sight difficult to ex-
plain. Del. thinks that they are
historical perfects ; that Jehovah
has already equipped himself for
judgment, and seen with surprise
that no man takes his side, but not
as yet obtained satisfaction for his
dishonoured holiness. To me it
appears that to divide the descrip-
tion of the theophany between the
past and the future seriously injures
its poetical effect, nor can I see that
it is necessary to do. The case
seems tome to be analogous to that
of Joel ii. 18, 19. The Jews in the
time of Joel were in great trouble,
and had been called to repentance.
The prophet foresees that Jehovah
will pity and grant relief, and de-
scribes this in prophetic perfects
(‘Then was Jehovah jealous...
pitied . . . answered and_ said’).
Precisely so here. All is still future,
though described as past in the
language of prophetic certitude.——
That there was no man| The ap-
parent parellelism of Jer. v. 1 is de-
lusive ; ‘no man’ does not heremean
‘no man of honesty and integrity,’
but ‘no champion.’ It corresponds
to the phrase in the next jine, ‘none
to interpose.” Comp. Ezek. xxii.
30, ‘And I sought fora man among
them who should make up the

' Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, p. 57.

[CHAP. LIX,

86 ISAIAII,

And Jehovah saw it, and it was evil in his eyes that there
was no justice ; '8and he saw that there was no man, and was
stupefied that there was none to interpose ; therefore his own
arm wrought salvation for him, and his own righteousness
upheld him. 1!’ And he put on righteousness as a coat of
mail, and the helmet of deliverance upon his head; and he
put on gartnents of vengeance for clothing, and clad himself
with jealousy as a mantle. '* According to their deserts, ac-
cordingly he will repay, wrath to his adversaries, retribution
to his enemies; to the countries he will repay retribution.
19 And they shall fear the Name of Jehovah from the sun’s

fence ... but I found none.’ In
the parallel passage, Ixiii. 5, we find
“none to help,’ and ‘none to up-
hold.’ It is only the necessities of
parallelism which have separated
the substantive from its participial
adjective. Was _ stupefied]
‘Durior est metaphora de Deo
usurpata, quze, nisi fallor, alibi non
occurrit. Sed Jesaias passim valde
est evepyns in omni sua dictione, et
figuras orationis ex alto petit. In
re ipsa significat summum ejus rei
de qua agitur wapddogov. A parte
Dei ipsius docet metaphora, Deum
instar stupentis aliquamdiu tacitum
exspectasse, hoc est, moram aliquam
traxisse antequam ecclesiz labo-
ranti succurreret.’ Vitringa com-
paring Ps. |. 21, ‘ These things thou
doest, and I am silent.’ If the
precise word ‘ was stupefied’ is not
again applied to Jehovah (except
in Ixiii. 5), an equally forcible one
is in Jer. xiv. 9, ‘Why shouldst
thou be as a man 7” consternation
(nidham), as a mighty man that
cannot deliver?’ The painful as-
tonishment spoken of here is appa-
rently inconsistent with other pas-
sages, in which deliverance from
trouble is ascribed to God alone.
But we have no right to strain a
bold, poetical phrase in a dogmatic
interest. None to interpose]
viz., in battle ; elsewhere in prayer
(lili. 12). Therefore his own
arm... ] Sword and bow are un-
necessary : ‘with battles of swing-
ing will he fight against them’
(xxx. 32).—The words recur in xiii,

5, with the changes of ‘my’ and
‘me’ for‘ his’ and‘ him,’ and ‘ fury’
for ‘righteousness’ ; comp. Job xl.
14, Ps. xeviii. 1. Deliverance]
Here and in v. 17 in the common
sense of victory (as I Sam. xiv. 45).

18 To the countries he will
repay retribution] The fate of
the rebel Israelites is merged in
that of the heathen. By ‘the coun-
tries,’ the prophet means, not merely
the peoples of Asia Minor who,
under the leadership of Crcesus,
had helped the Babylonians against
Cyrus (Knob.), but all the nations
of the heathen world, banded to-
gether for a final struggle against
Jehovah. It is as an act in the
great drama of the world judg-
ment that the prophet regards the
impending deliverance of the Jews
(comp. on chap. xxiv.).

19 Those Gentiles who are spared
are imagined as hastening from
their distant abodes in tremulous
anxiety to meet Jehovah.——Fear
the name of Jehovah] A striking
amplification of the common phrase
‘fear Jehovah,’ found also in Deut.
xxviii. 58, Mic. vi. 9 (probably : see
Q. P. B.), Neh. i. 11, Ps. Ixxxvi. 11,
and especially cii. 15 (which is
clearly a quotation from our pas-
sage). ‘Name’; see on xxx. 27,
Ixili, 9.——He shall come] i.e.,
Jehovah, or, more correctly, the
Name of Jehovah. Comp. ‘(the
Face) heareth,’ lix. 2; ‘the Name
of Jehovah cometh, xxx. 27.
Like arushing stream... dri-
veth] So, in xxx. 27, 28, after men-

CHAP. LIX.] ISAIAH. 87

setting, and his glory from the sun’s rising; 4for he shall
come like a rushing stream,* * which the breath of Jehovah
driveth,* 2 but as a Goel shall he come to Zion, and unto
those that have turned from rebellion in Jacob: the oracle
of Jehovah. #! And I—this is my covenant with them, saith
Jehovah, My spirit which is upon thee, and my words which

4 So Sept., Vulg., Symmachus, Saadya, Ew., Knob.—For.. . like a straitened

(i.e., dammed-up) stream, Lowth, Ges., Del., Naeg.—For adversity shall come in like
a stream, Hitz.—When the adversary (or, adversity, Targ.) shall come in like the (or

a) river, Hebr. accents, Targ., Pesh., Calv., Vitr., Hend., Kay.
© So Vulg., Lowth, Ges., Hitz., Ew., Knob., Del., Naeg.—The spirit of Jehovah
shall lift up a banner against him, Targ., Vitr., Hend., Kay.

tioning the coming of the Name
of Jehovah, the prophet continues,
‘And his breath is as an overflow-
ing stream.’ Alt. rend is in itself
noble and poetical; comp. Jer.
xlvi. 7, 8, where the hostile move-
ment of Egypt is compared to a
flood. It has been vigorously sup-
ported by Dr. Kay, but is contrary
tothe connection, which requires a
continuous description of the theo-
phany. I feel uncertain, however,
whether the words rendered ‘rush-
ing’ and ‘driveth’ are not corrupt.

*0 But as a Goel shall he come]
This prediction differs rather in
tone from xli. 14, xliii. 1, and similar
passages in which Jehovah is re-
ferred to as Israel’s Goel. It wants
the usual setting of kindly en-
couragement, and reminds us rather
of less evangelical prophecies, such
as chap. i. To Zion] i.e., to the
remnant of Israel—‘those that have
turned from rebellion’ (comp. i. 27),
as the parallel line tells us. This
limitation is one which English
students of the prophecies would
do well to remember: it shows
that the Messianic promises to
Israel are only meant for a con-
verted and regenerate people.

21 And I—this is my covenant
with them] There are several re-
markable points about this closing
verse, (1) its change of number and
person (‘with them ...upon thee’);
(2) its tone of promise and en-
couragement ; (3) the difficulty of
connecting it with the preceding

verses. The first point is slight ;
changes almost as striking occur
elsewhere. The plural probably
refers, not to the converts spoken
of in uv. 20 (as V. F. Oehler), but to
the person addressed in the second
person together with his descend-
ants. The second and third points
seem to me to indicate that the
verse has been removed hither
from some other position. The
recipient of the ‘covenant’ (or,
appointment, see footnote on xlii.
7) 1s the spiritual Israel, to whom
a similar promise has already been
given in xliv. 3. Klostermann in-
deed has a strange theory that the
recipient is the prophetic writer,
and that his prophetic gifts are to
descend to his sons and grand-
sons. But the promise is too high
for an ordinary man, and its validity
is not confmed to ‘sons and grand-
sons’; it is to last ‘from hence-
forth even for ever”! To whom
can such words apply, but to the
imperishable people of Jehovah?
Israel, according to II. Isaiah, is
destined to be the religious centre,
from which the words of truth
radiate in all directions.——my
words ...in thy mouth] The
‘words’ referred to are not the
message of the true God which
Israel is to carry to the Gentiles
(Knob.), but all God’s revelations,
whether declaratory of his character
or predictive of the future of the
world, of all which Israel is the
depository (comp. li. 16 ?).

1 Klostermann supposes the author of this verse tc be a student of Isaizh who has
assumed his master's mantle (Ze/tschr. f. luther. Theologie, 1876, p. 46).

[CHAP. Lx.

88 ISATATI.

I have put in thy mouth, shall not withdraw from thy mouth,
nor from the mouth of thy sced, nor from the mouth of thy
seed’s seed, saith Jehovah, from henceforth even for ever.

CHAPTER LX.

Contents.—Song upon glorified Zion, in five stanzas—I. vv. 1-4 ; I. vv.
5-93 Il. vv. 10-14; IV. vv. 15-18; V. vv. 19-22. The leading idea of
the first stanza is the return of the exiles ; of the second, the rebuilding
of the temple ; of the third, the glory of the new Jerusalem; of the
fourth, the prosperity of the state ; while the fifth and last exhausts the
powers of language in describing the favour which Jehovah will extend to
his righteous people.

The song looks as if it were a designed counterpart to the magnificent
ode in chap. xlvii. The one described Babylon’s fall ; the other glorifies
Jerusalem’s rising again. It further resembles its lyric predecessor in the
looseness of its connection with the prophecies among which it is inserted,
and it is not an unreasonable conjecture that both songs originally existed
in a separate form.

1 Arise, be lightsome, for thy light hath come, and the
glory of Jehovah hath dawned upon thee. ? For, behold, the
darkness shall cover the earth, and a deep gloom the nations,
but upon thee shall Jehovah dawn, and his glory shall appear
upon thee ; *and nations shall set forth unto thy light, and
kings to the brilliance of thy dawning. ‘4 Lift up thine eyes
round about and see: they are all gathered together and
come unto thee: thy sons come from far, and thy daughters

1,2 The ideal Zion (see on xl. 9) bidden to arise and drink in the

is personified as a woman lying on
the ground in mental and bodily
prostration—it is the same figure as
in li, 23, ii... Thick darkness en-
folds the earth, the darkness which
typifies alienation from God. But
Jehovah has begun to reveal him-
self anew—not as yet to the whole
earth, but to its central, one may
almost say its mediatorial people,
Israel. As ‘the children of Israel
had light in their dwellings, when
there was ‘ thick darkness in all the
land of Egypt, so now there are
beaming over Israel the first rays
of a newly risen sun (comp. ix. 2).
Zion, however, is still held by the
stupor of captivity ; she is therefore

transfiguring brightness. Contrast
the summons to Babylon in xlvii. 1.

1 The glory of Jehovah] Jeho-
vah is a ‘sun’ as well as a ‘shield’
(Ps. Ixxxiv. 11), the ‘sun of right-
eousness’ (Mal. iv. 2). The same
figure is implied in Ps. xviii. 12
(13), Hab. iii. 4, where the same
word (zé6gah, ‘brilliance’) is used
for the appearance of the Divine
glory as in v. 3.

‘ Lift up... and come unto
thee] Repeated from xlix. 18.
Thy sons thy daughters]
See on xlix. 22. Supported on
the side] i.e., on the hip (so Ixvi.
12), the arm of the mother ‘ sup-
porting’ the child’s back, a custom

89

are supported on the side. ®Then shalt thou *see and be
radiant ; and thy heart shall throb and be enlarged © ; for the
abundance of the sea shall turn unto thee, the riches of the
nations shall come unto thee. ®A swarm of camels shall
cover thee—young camels of Midian and Ephah, from Sheba
shall they all come, bearing gold and incense, and heralding
the praises of Jehovah. 7 All the flocks of Kedar shall gather
unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee:
they shall go up mine altar acceptably, and my glorious house
will I glorify. ®Who are these that fly as the clouds, and

8 Fear. Many Hebr. MSS., Lo., Vitr., Ges. (another reading). The Massoretic
reading is undoubtedly ‘thou sh-It see,’ though the alternative reading has much

CHAP. LX.] ISAIAIL

authority, including that of A. E.

> Tremble,
Syriasm.
still kept up both in the Semitic
and the non-Semitic East. Older
children would be carried on the
shoulder (xlix. 22).

5 Then shalt thou see] If the
former summons has been neg-
lected, then (when the prophecy
has been fulfilled) thou shalt per-
force take notice. Alt. reading in-
volves a tautology.——Be radiant]
viz., with joy ; the same word oc-
curs in Ps, xxxiv. 6 (5). Shall
throb] ‘As a man shudders at an
unexpected deliverance’(Ibn Ezra).
Comp. Jer. xxxili. 9, ‘They shall
fear and shudder (the same word as
here) for all the goodness,’ &c.
Be enlarged] i.e., have a sense of
freedom and happiness (so Ps. cxix.
32). The opposite is ‘ to be strait-
ened’ (so Lam. i. 20, comp. Jer. iv.
19, Q. P. &.).——The abundance
of the sea] i.e., the wealth of the
maritime countries of the West (in
Hebrew, ‘ the sea’).

6,7 This passage has perhaps a
bearing on the question as to the
date of II. Isaiah. As Prof. A. S.
Wilkins remarks, ‘the country with
which the historic Isaiah was espe-
cially familiar would lie somewhat
out of the direct line of this com-
merce’! Still, the tradition con-
necting these nations with Abraham
(comp. Gen. xxv. 2-4, 13) can
hardly have been unknown to
Isaiah, and this would sufficiently

Some MSs., Sept. (another reading).

But rahad, ‘to tremble,’ is a

account for his giving them so
honourable a mention. On _ the
other hand, it is extremely douistful
whether the names Kedar and
Nebaioth (in v. 7) were still tribal
appellations in the time of the
Exile. If, therefore, we assign a
Babylonian origin to II. Isaiah,
we must probably assume that the
names in question are used with
poetical liberty.—On the commerce
of Arabia, see Alexander’ nctes,

_and comp. Movers, Die Phénizier,

ii. 3, p. 293.

®° Ephah] A ‘son’ of Midian
(Gen. xxv. 4); mentioned (under
the form Khayappa) in an inscrip-
tion of Tiglath-Pileser II. in com-
pany with Massa and Tema, tribes
of N. Arabia.2»—— Sheba] The
caravans of the Midianites, espe-
cially those of Ephah (Gen. xxv. 4),
appear to have gone to Sheba (or
Yemen) for gold and spices.——
The praises] i.¢., the praiseworthy
deeds (as lxiii. 7).

’ Kedar . .. Nebaioth] The
Kidrai (see on xxii. 16) and the
Nabaital are mentioned in the Ass.
inscriptions side by side. These
Arabian Nabaitai are distinct from
the Aramzean Nabatu of the in-
scriptions (A. A. 7, p. 147).

8 who are these...] The
predictive tone gives place for a
moment to the descriptive. Itisa
vision of the sea which we have be-

1 Wilkins, Phenicta and Israel (Lond. 1871), p. 110.
? Schrader, A. G. /., pp. 261-2; comp. Friedr. Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradies? p. 304.

go ISAIAH, (cap. Lx.
as doves to their lattices? °® Yea, *for me the countries wait °
and the ships of Tarshish are the foremost, to bring thy sons
from far, their silver and their gold with them, to the name
of Jehovah thy God, and to the Holy One of Israel, inasmuch
as he hath glorified thee.

10 And strangers shall build thy walls, and their kings
shall minister unto thee, for in my wrath I smote thee, and
in my favour I will have compassion upon thee: ''and thy
gates shall stand open continually, day and night they shall
not be shut, that men may bring unto thee the riches of the
nations, and their kings led along: ” for the nation and king-
dom that will not serve thee shall perish, and those nations
shall surely be laid waste. 18 The glory of Lebanon shall come

© Unto me the countries shall assemble, Luz., Geiger (changing vowel-points).

fore us—of the sea covered by ships,
which with their outspread sails
resemble the clouds, or flights of
home-sickdoves (comp. Hos. xi. 11).

9 fhe countries wait] The
‘countries’ (i.e., the ‘ far-off peoples,’
xlix. 1) ‘wait’ in believing expect-
ancy for the blessings which be-
long to them too, at least in the
second rank. This is one motive
for their haste. Another is regard
for the children of Zion, who are
impatient to be restored to their
home. Ships of Tarshish| Or,
‘Tarshish-ships’ (ships of the first
class, suitable for long voyages,
comp. 1 Kings x. 22).——Their
silver] i.e., the silver of the Gen-
tiles (vv. 6, 11), not of the Israelites.
——To the name] ie. to the
place of the name (xviii. 7). The
clause is almost a verbal repetition
of lv. 5 &.

10 and strangers... ] ‘ The
walls of Zion are raised with the
willing co-operation of converted
foreigners (lvi. 6, 7), thinks De-
litzsch. But does not the contex:
(see vv. 11, 12, 14) point rather to
the mass of the heathen world than
to willing proselytes? Is not the
submission of these foreigners
rather a consequence of the recent
judgment (comp. lix. 197) than the
result of spiritual affinitics? See
Ixi. 5, 6, where the assignment of

menial services to ‘strangers’ is
evidently intended as a retribution
(comp. xiv. 2). This passage illus-
trates Ixi. 4 (see note).

| Thy gates shall stand open]
Because there will be ‘no night
there’ (comp. v. 20, Rev. xxi. 25),
and no foes seeking entrance, but
an endless stream of caravans.——
And their kings led along] i.e.,
not ‘accompanied by a large re-
tinue’ (Kimchi, Vitr., Lo., Ges. in
Commentary), but (as the verb
always means) ‘led captive’ (same
word in xx. 4), or at least ‘led
against their will.’ All eager to
minister to Israel, the ‘far-off na-
tions’ force their reluctant chiefs to
join them. The reason is given in
the next verse.

12 The prosperity of Gentile na-
tions shall depend on their relations
to Israel (comp. Zech. xiv. 17, 18).
Nations laid waste]
‘Nation’ and ‘territory’ being con-
vertible terms in Hebrew, whatever
is predicted of the one may also
be predicted of the other (comp.
xxxvil. 18, 2 Kings iii. 23, Hebr.).

18 The barren hills of Jerusalem
shall henceforth be decked with the
most beautiful forest-trees (see on
xli. 19 6). —— The place of my
sanctuary] What sanctuary? It is
natural to think first of the temple.
The trees which have been men-

CHAP. LX.] ISAIAH. gI

unto thee, the pine and the plane and the sherbin together, that
I may glorify the place of my sanctuary, and make the place
of my feet honourable. And the sons of them that afflicted
thee shall go unto thee crouching, and all they that spurned
thee shall bow down to the soles of thy feet, and they shall’
call thee, City of Jehovah, Zion of the Holy One of Israel.

6 Instead of thy being forsaken and hated, and with none
passing through, I will make thee an everlasting pride, the
delight of successive generations. 1 And thou shalt suck the
milk of nations, and the breast of kings shalt thou suck, and
thou shalt know that I Jehovah am thy saviour, and that thy
Goel is the Hero of Jacob. '7Instead of copper I will bring
gold, and instead of iron I will bring silver, and instead of
wood copper, and instead of stones iron; and I will make
4 peace thy government, and righteousness thy magistrates.4

4 Thy government peace (i.e., peace-loving) . .. Sept., Saad., Hitz., Knob.,

Henderson.

tioned might be required, either, if
felled, for the temple-buildings (so
Vitr.), or, if unfelled, for decorating
the temple-courts, comp. Ps. lii. 8,
xcii. 13 (so Del.). But the Shekinah
is no longer confined to a single
house: all Jerusalem has become
the ‘sanctuary’ of Jehovah (so too,
perhaps, iv. 5).

4 The sons of them that af-
flicted thee] ‘The sons,’ appa-
rently because the ‘afflicters’
themselves will have perished in
the Divine judgment.——zion of
the Holy One... ] Acombination
like ‘ Bethlehem (of) Judah.’

15 Forsaken and hated] Zion is
again imagined as Jehovah’s bride
(comp. 1. 1, liv. 6). But the figure
is not carried out consistently.—
The word ‘hated’ is used in Gen.
Xxix. 31, Deut. xxi. 15, of a less be-
loved wife.

16 And thou shalt suck... |
Perhaps a reminiscence of Deut.
xxxill, 19, ‘They shall suck the
abundance of the seas.’ The
breast of kivgs] ‘Of kings ;’
perhaps to exclude a realistic inter-
pretation. The phrase strikingly
indicates the new feeling of ten-
derness towards Zion which shall
animate the kings of the earth

(comp. xlix. 23). That I Jeho-
vah...] Repeated from xlix. 26

17 gynstead of copper...
Evidently an allusion to the ac-
count of Solomon in 1 Kings x. 21,
27. The language is of course
figurative, and means that the new
Jerusalem shall be at the height of
splendour and security (metal tak-
ing the place of stone). ‘Will
make peace thy government]
For the prosopopceia, comp. xxxil.
16, 17, lix. 14.—It has been
questioned whether ‘peace’ and
‘righteousness’ are accusatives of
the object or of the predicate.
But, as Naeg. well remarks, it
would be comparatively little to
say that Jerusalem’s governors
should be men of peace and
righteousness, for this would not
exclude much unhappiness and un-
righteousness among the governed.
But if Peace and Righteousness
themselves are the governors, it is
as much as to say that government
in the ordinary sense has become
superfluous. — This passage evi-
dently implies that those for whom
our prophet wrote only had the
Messianic belief in its wider sense,
Jehovah alone being Israel’s king.

92 ISAIAH. [CHAP. LXI.

18 Violence shall no more be heard of in thy land, desolation
nor destruction in thy borders ; and thou shalt call thy walls
Salvation, and thy gates Renown.

‘9 No more shalt thou have the sun for a light by day,
and as for brightness, the moon shall not enlighten thee ; but
thou shalt have Jehovah for an everlasting light, and thy God
for thy glory. ®° No more shall thy sun go down, and thy
moon shall not withdraw itself, for thou shalt have Jehovah
for an everlasting light, and thy days of mourning are ful-
filled. *! And thy people shall be all righteous, they shall
possess the Jand for ever ; the shoots of my plantation, the
work of my hands, for showing myself glorious. 2 The smallest
shall become a thousand, and the least a great nation; I
Jehovah in its time will hasten it.

18 Shalt call thy walls Salva-
tion. . . |] Thereisthe same doubt
as to whether the abstract nouns
are objects or predicates as in v.
17. Such names as ‘Salvation’
and ‘ Renown’ would not be impos-
sible ; Naeg. (on xxvi. 1) reminds
us that the walls of Babylon were
named.'! But it is more forcible to
take ‘ Salvation’ and ‘Renown’ as
accusatives of the object. The
meaning of the passage will then
be ‘Thou shalt need no walls nor
gates, for Jehovah shall be a con-
stant source of salvation, and of a
renown which shall keep all foes at
a distance.’ Comp. xxvi. I, Xxxlii.
21. We need not mind the obvious
inconsistency with vv. Io, 11, for
we are in the region of symbol and
metaphor,

1° The sun fora light] See note
on xxx. 26,

20 Go down] Lit., ‘go in,’ viz.
into his chamber (Ps. xix. 5).
Itself] Lit. ‘himself.’ Both sun
and moon are masc. in the Semitic
languages, and have male divinities
corresponding to them.

*\ Thy people ... for ever]
Now that Israel is righteous, there
will be no reason for the stern dis-
cipline of exile ; comp. lix. 13, 14.
The shoots of my plantation]
and therefore flourishing ; comp.
Ps. Ixxx. 9, I0.

#2 The smallest] i.e., he who has
few or no children. —A thousand,
ie., probably, a chiliad, or part of
a tribe (so Del.); comp. Mic. v. 2
(Hebr. 1), which makes a fine con-
trast with ‘nation’ in the next line.

CHAPTER LXI.

A SOLILOQUY of the Servant? concerning the message of grace, com-
fort, and prosperity committed to him for Zion by Jehovah.—But is it really
‘the Servant’ who is the speaker? The title itself does not occur once
throughout the soliloquy. Hence it is not surprising that several modern
critics (Hitz, Ew., Knob., Diestel) question this view, and assign the
1 See R. P., v. 124; Schrader, AV. 1. 7, p. 185 (on 1 Kings vii. 21).
* So Hengst., Stier, Del., Seinecke, Kay, Naeg., and so /, C. 4., p. 216. De-

Jitzsch, therefore, is not so comparatively isolated as he supposes. (Fesuta, 3te Ausg.
p- 620.)

CHAP. LXI.] ISAIAH. 93
speech to the prophet who writes these chapters ; the Targum, too, dog-
matically asserts, ‘(Thus) saith the prophet.’ Our conclusion will depend
mainly on that which we have adopted with regard to 1. 4-9—a passage
in some respects closely parallel to the present. There, as well as here,
the title of the speaker is withheld; there, as well as here, the opening
verse declares the mission of the speaker to be pre-eminently one of
consolation. It is true that in]. 5 the speaker suddenly turns aside to
describe his patience under persecution ; but this is all the more reason
why in the present chapter he should compensate us for our disappoint-
ment by resuming the strain so abruptly cut short. Diestel' urges two
objections against assigning this soliloquy to the Servant, viz., 1. that the
personification of the Servant ceases with chap. liii., and z. that as the
prophet is himself a member of the organism of the Servant, whatever
can be predicated of the one both can and must be true of the other,
The answer to I. is, that it is an assumption based on a too exclusive
view of chaps. liv., lv., and the very loosely connected discourses which
follow ; to 2., that precisely as in xliv. 26 we find the prophetic writer
described as ‘his (Jehovah’s) servant,’ without precluding the higher
acceptation of the term in lii. 13, so the occurrence of the phrase ‘the
servants of Jehovah’ in liv. 17 does not destroy the superior right of
Him who is pre-eminently the Servant of Jehovah. True, the speaker in
chap. Ixi. does not expressly assume the title; but is it necessary that he
should? Having been introduced as the Servant in xlii. 1-4, why should
he not sometimes speak in his own name? It may safely be affirmed
that, but for the absence of the title ‘the Servant, no one could fail to
be struck by the appropriateness of vv. 1-3 (especially) to the personal
Servant of Jehovah :—the great things which the speaker volunteers to
do are so far beyond the range of a mere prophet like ourauthor. This
need not, however, hinder us from admitting that vv. 4-9 have nothing
to mark them out as belonging to the Servant. Just as here and there
in St. John’s Gospel the speeches of our Lord suddenly pass into re-
flexions of the Evangelist, so it may here be that the prophet for a time
takes the place of the Servant ; comp. 1. Io, 11.

1 The Spirit of * [the Lord]* Jehovah is upon me, because
Jehovah hath anointed me to bring good tidings to the
afflicted, hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to pro-

4 Omitted in Sept., Vulg., one MS. (Kennicott), two early editions.

1 The Spirit. . . is upon me]
Precisely the same statement is
made respecting the Servant in
xlii, I. Hath anointed me]
Anointing was the rite with which
both priests (Ex. xxix. 7, Lev. vii.
36) and kings (1 Sam. ix. 16, x. I,
xvi. 13) were consecrated. But the
phrase ‘to anoint’ seems to be also

used metaphorically for ‘to appoint
te a sacred office.’ Thus in 1 Kings
xix. 16 Elijah is directed to anoint’
Elisha, though, as the sequel shows,
Elisha was never actually anointed.
So, too, in xlv. 1 Cyrus is called
‘Jehovah’s Anointed One,’ i.e., His
chosen instrument ; and ini John
ii. 20 (comp. v. 27) the ‘unction

1 Der Prophet Fesaia, erklért von Dr. A. Knobel. Vierte Auflage, herausgeg. von

Dr. L. Diestel, p. 487.

94

ISAIATI.

[CIIAP. LXI.

claim liberty to the captives, and ® opening (of the prison)»
to the bound ; ?to proclaim an acceptable year of Jehovah,
and a day of vengeance of our God; **to comfort® the
mournful ones of Zion, to give them a coronet instead of
ashes, oil of joy “for the raiment of mourning, a song of
praise? for a failing spirit, so that men shall call them oaks
of righteousness, the plantation of Jehovah for showing
> Opening (of the eyes), TEXT (see crit. note).

© So Bi. ;

to comfort all mournful ones,—to set upon, TEXT.

4 So Bi. ; for mourning, a garment of praise (or, renown), TEXT.

from the Holy One’ is also clearly
metaphorical——To bring good
tidings] Hebr. ?éhassér, happily
rendered by Sept. evayyedicac Oat
(similariy throughout II. Isaiah,
where verb and participle occur
five times, except xli. 27).——To
proclaim liberty The
speaker feels impelled to preach a
deliverance on a grander scale than
that of the year of Jubilee. He
probably copies the phraseology of
the law of Jubilee (comp. Jer.
xxxiv. 8, Ezek. xlvi. 17, Lev. xxv.
10), but applies it with poetical
freedom ; the law of Jubilee says
nothing about the release of prison-
ers or the remission of debts.!
To the captives] See on xlii. 7.

2 An acceptable year] Obs.
the antithesis between the ‘year’
of grace and the ‘ day of vengeance’
(so Ixiii. 4, whereas xxxiv. 8 is only
partly parallel). It reminds us of
the contrast in Ex. xx. 5, 6 (comp.
Deut. vii. 9), where retribution is
declared to descend to the third
and fourth generation, but mercy
to the thousandth ; comp. also liv.
8 (note). ‘Year’ is of course used
rhetorically, though, strange to say,
this passage gave rise to the theory
of some of the Christian Fathers
that the public ministry of our
Lord lasted but a single year.
AM mourniul ones| Zion occupies
the foreground of the speaker’s
thoughts (comp. next verse and
Ivii. 18 4), but the marks of suscep-
tibility of the Divine promises are
in the two opening verses perhaps
designedly left free from national

limitations (comp. Ivii. 15). See
above, on ‘to the captives, and
below on ‘a failing spirit.’

° The prophet, as it were, re-
verses the sad picture in iii. 24.
On the text, see crit. note——a
Coronet instead of ashes] In v.
10 we read of the bridegroom’s
‘coronet’ ; by using the same word
here the prophet may imply that
the penitents were newly espoused
to their Divine Lord. The Hebrew
expresses the change in their state
by a striking assonance (2 ¢a-
khath ‘éfer), which Ewald strives
to represent by ‘schmuck statt
schmutz,’ ‘ Ashes,’ i.e., ashes strewn
upon the head, were a sign ofmourn-
ing ; comp. 2 Sam. xiii. 19. —Oilof
joy] The phrase only occurs again
in Ps. xlv. (v. 7 = Hebr. 8), the royal
nuptial song.——A failing spirit]
The word is the same as in xiii. 3,
‘a dimly burning wick’ (comp. xlii.
4, and Ezek. xxi. 7=Hebr. 12), a
phrase which, be it remarked, refers,
at any rate, partly to the Gentiles.
Oaks of righteousness] i.e.,
strong and enduring, because
‘rooted and grounded’ in right-
eousness. Whose righteousness?
we may ask; that of man or of God?
The former, is certainly the most
natural reply: ‘righteousness’ in
a phrase of this construction ought
to mean an intrinsic quality of the
‘oaks’; comp. liv. 14. It is no
counter-argument that in v. Io
‘righteousness’ means God’s right-
eousness as exhibited in the pros-
perity of his own, for we have the
two senses of righteousness equally

1 Mr. Fenton has explained the institution of the Jubilee as a relic of the ‘ Village
Community’ system of land tenure (/fedrew Social Life, 1880).

CHAP. LXt.] ISAIAH, 95

himself glorious. 4 And they shall build up the ruins of
antiquity, the desolations of the forefathers shall they raise
up, and shall renew the ruined cities, the desolations of past
generations. ®And strangers shall stand and feed your
flocks, and aliens shall be your ploughmen and your vine-
dressers, ®but ye—the priests of Jehovah shall ye be
called ; men shall name you the ministers of our God ; the
riches of the naticn shall ye eat, and *of their glory shall ye

make your boast.°

7[fInstead of your shame ye shall have

© To their glory shall ye succeed, Saadya, Rashi, Ges. (Thesaurus), Hitz., Ew., Knob.

{ The text is tautological, and may be incorrect.

below the rest.

close together in liv. 14,17. The
next words, the plantation of
Jehovah, &c., are repeated almost
verbally from Ix. 21 4.

4 and they shall build up... ]
The implied subject is ‘strangers ’
(see v. 5). We have thus a varia-
tion from the parallel passage, Iviii.
12. Obs., the speaker’s attention
is concentrated on the first act of
the great drama of Israel’s regene-
ration. He presently passes on
to the more splendid second act,
which he describes as if it syn-
chronised with the first. The first
act is the return of the exiles and
the rebuilding of the desolate cities
of Judah ; the second, the union
of Jews and Gentiles in one great
and glorious religious community.

5 Shall stand and feed] The
description is still true to life.
(Thomson, Zhe Land and the
Book, p. 599). Your plough-
men... | No brilliant prospect
for the ‘aliens, if the peasants of
the Messianic period were to be
as miserable and downtrodden a
race as the Fellahs of Palestine
are now! But we must evidently
suppose that all classes in the
‘coming age’ were to partake in
their several degrees of the Mes-
sianic blessing. A relative differ-
ence between classes would remain,
but it would be accepted thankfully
even by those lowest in the scale
(comp. xlv. 14). The highest place

1 Alttestamentliche Theologie, rst ed., i.

At any rate this verse falls much

would naturally be reserved for
the Israelites. These would be
called the priests of Jehovah, for
they would have realised the ideal
set forth in Ex. xix. 6, and be able
to dispense with a separate sacer-
dotal order (see, however, Ixvi. 21).
The priests, as Hermann Schultz
justly remarks,’ were only an official
representation of Israel’s national
idea, viz., that those, with whom
their God had entered into cove-
nant-relations, should be both out-
wardly and inwardly worthy of their
high position. The existence of
the priesthood did not by any means
imply that the rest of the people
were profane; it was only provi-
sional. But when the Israelites
had become a ‘kingdom of priests’
(Ex. 2. c.), who were to occupy the
place out of which the faithful por-
tion of the people had just been
raised? The Gentile world (comp.
Zech. viii. 23). This ‘natural and
surely not unlovely touch of national
complacency’ was never quite lost
by any of the Old Testament writers.
——Shall ye make your boast]
It is a strong argument for this
reading that the same verb in the
same conjugation occurs in this
sense in Ps. xciv. 4, which forms
part of the deutero-Isaianic section
of the Psalter (Ps. xci.-c).”

7 Ye shall have double] i.e.,
double compensation. Comp. Zech.
ix. 12, ‘Yea, to-day do I foretell

183-4.

? See Canon Elliott's comparative list of passages in the Speaker's Commentary,

iv. 506, &c.

96 ISAIAH.

[CHAP, LXI.

double, and (instead of) reproach they shall exult for their
portion; therefore in their land they shall possess double,

everlasting joy shall be unto them.‘]

® For I Jehovah love

justice, I hate unjust rapine, and I will give them their recom-
pence faithfully, and an everlasting covenant will I make
with them; “so that their seed shall be known among the
nations, and their offspring in the midst of the peoples—all
that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are a seed

which Jehovah hath blessed.

0 T will greatly rejoice in Jehovah; let my soul exult in
my God, for he hath clothed me with garments of salvation,
in a robe of righteousness hath he arrayed me, like a bride-

that I will recompense double unto
thee’; also Jer. xvi. 14-18, ‘ where
the unparalleled grandeur of the
second restoration of the Jews is
justified by the extreme severity
of their previous chastisement.’! It
is not, however, double compensa-
tion in honour which is intended
(Naeg., and partly Knob.), for this
would not be concrete enough for
the prophets. ‘The land’ was the
one blessing which included all
others. Hence the prophecy con-
tinues, therefore (i.e., the result
will be that—see on xxvi. 14) in
their land they shall possess
double, i.e, their ancient land
(=‘their portion’ in the former
half of the verse) shall be restored
in more than its old fertility and
with extended boundaries. Thus
the idea of this passage is the
counterpart of that in xl. 2; the
peculiarity of Jer. xvi. 14-18 is that
it unites both ideas (see above).

8 For I Jehovah love justice
... ] The speaker quotes a con-
firmatory utterance of Jehovah.
The ‘right’ of the Israelites has
been violently ‘torn away’ (comp
x. 2, same word): Jehovah, who
hates injustice, will compensate
them for their sufferings. Kloster-
mann’s interpretation (now adopted
by Del.) is over-subtle: ‘the
Israelites shall not return as con-

uerors, as their ancestors entered

anaan, by the right of the strong-

est, but with the free-will of their
former enemies.’—— Their recom-
pence] i.e., compensation for their
sufferings (comp. on wv. 7),—
Faithfully] i.e., without curtail-
ment, in exact accordance with his
promise. An everlasting cove-
nant] See on lv. 3.

® Known] i.e., renowned.

10 x will greatly rejoice ... ]
According to the Targum, Jeru-
salem is here the speaker, appro-
priating and rejoicing in the fore-
going promises. This is certainly
plausible, for the speaker clearly
implies that he looks forward to
a share in the promised blessings,
and how can the Servant, himselt
the mediator of these blessings, feel
this longing ?— How? by his sym-
pathy ; forthough he has not literally
shared in the sin of his people, he
has ‘taken it upon him’? (iii. 4, 11)
out of sympathy, and must be both
able and desirous, through the
same fellow-feeling, to share in the
coming blessedness. It is the Ser-
vant of Jehovah, then, who con-
tinues to speak.——Garments of
salvation] The figure reminds us
of lix. 17. Righteousness] i.e.,
the prosperity which a righteous
God will give (comp. on liv. 17).
Like a bridegroom ...] The
simile is very loosely attached, but
it is evidently the Servant, and not
Jehovah, who is the subject of com-
parison. The Israelitish bridegroom

17.0. A, p. 147.

CHAP. LXII.]

ISATAIT.

97

groom that maketh his coronet priestly, and like a bride that

putteth on her jewels.

1 For like the earth which bringeth

forth its sprouting, and like a garden which causeth the things
sown in it to sprout, so [the Lord] Jehovah shall cause right-
eousness to sprout, even renown before all the nations.

appears, from Cant. iii. 11, to have
been crowned ‘on the day of his
espousals,’ and so, at least in later
times, was the bride. A well-known
passage in the Mishna (Soéa, ix. 14)
states that during the war of Ves-
pasian bridegrooms were forbidden
to wear crowns (‘a¢aroth), and that
during that of Titus (Gratz corrects
‘Quietus’) the prohibition was ex-
tended to brides—a sign of the
passionate grief of the Jews at the
ruin of the nation. The promise of
Jehovah, realised by faith, is com-
pared by the Servant to such a
headdress. From the expression
‘maketh priestly, it would seem

that the style of this headdress
resembled that of the priests’ tiara
(Ex. xxix. 9, comp. Jos. Azzé. iil. 7,
3). To suppose that this resem-
blance was symbolical of the priestly
character of the head of the house-
hold, seems to me farfetched. It
is well known that archaic forms
and fashions linger longest in ritual
and ceremonial observances.

Jlcause,. to sprout] Another
allusion (comp. xlii. 9, xliil. 19, lviii.
8) to the self-fulfilling power of the
Divine word. Renown] Lit.,
‘praise.’ The prophet means events
stirring up men to praise Israel and
Israel’s God.

CHAPTER LXII.

Contents.—A continuation of the bright promises of the last chapter,
concluding with the welcome summons to depart from Babylon.—Most
modern critics regard this chapter as the soliloquy of the prophet ; Vitr.
alone gives it to a chorus of prophets and other servants of God, while
Henderson, Stier, Kay, Naeg., assign it to the Servant of Jehovah, or the
Messiah. If there is nothing in the chapter specially suggestive of the
Servant, and as the opening words ‘I will not be silent’ are elsewhere
uttered by Jehovah, it is safer to follow Targ., Ibn Ezra, Kimchi,
Luzzatto, Del., and suppose Jehovah himself to be the speaker. See
also note on vw 6.

1For Zion’s sake I will not be silent, and for Jerusalem’s
sake I will not rest, until her righteousness go forth as the
shining light, even her salvation as a torch that burneth.

1 But will these great promises
be realised? Will Jehovah indeed
‘cause righteousness to sprout’?
The ‘deep gloom’ with which Zion
as well as the other nations is still
oppressed may well excuse a mo-
ment of despondency. But Jeho-
vah will not let such despondency

VOL, IL

pass unchecked.—-z will not be
silent, he says, I will not for ever
hold back that restoring and re-
viving word for which my people
are longing. Comp. xlii. 14, lvii. 11,
Ixiv. 12, lxv. 6.——The shining
light] Lit., ‘the brilliance’; Ewald
has ‘der Sonnenstrahl.’ The word

H

98 ISAIATI, [CHAP. LXIL,
2 And the nations shall see thy righteousness, and all kings
thy glory, and men shall call thee by a new name which the
mouth of Jehovah shall appoint ; *and thou shalt be a crown
of adorning in the hand of Jehovah, and a diadem of royalty
in the open hand of thy God. 4 Nomore shalt thou be named
Forsaken, neither shall thy land any more be named Desola-
tion ; for thou shalt be called *Well-pleasing, and thy land

Married ; for Jehovah delighteth in thee, and thy land shall

be married.

5 For (as) a young man marrieth a virgin, thy

sons shall marry thee, and with the joy of the bridegroom
over the bride shall thy God joy over thee.

® Most render, My delight (is) in her ; comp., however, Oholibah, ‘there is a tent

in her,’ Ezek. xxiii. 4, and Smend, ad loc.

is used of the dawn (the Zastern
dawn) in ix. 2, Ix. 3, Dan. vi. 20, and
especially Prov. iv. 18. Luzzatto is
alone in thinking of the planet
Venus.

2 By a new name] So in Ixv.
15, ‘he shall call his servants by
another name. It is a title of
honour which is meant, such for
instance as that in Jer. xxxiii. 16,
‘Jehovah (is) our rmghteousness.’
This prophet however goes beyond
Jeremiah, for he speaks of a ‘new
name,’ one past human imagining,
and which, like the new heaven
and the new earth, depends upon
the appointment of the Creator ;
compare Rev. ii. 17, iii, 12 (in the
greek).

3 A crown of adorning] Not
‘the crown ;’ Jehovah has ‘many
crowns.’ The regeneration of Israel
constitutes a fresh claim on the
part of Jehovah to the reverence
and admiration of the universe
(comp. v. 2 a); this appears to be
the meaning of the prophecy.
Knobel, indeed, supposes the ex-
pression to be a figurative descrip-
tion of the situation of Jerusalem
(comp. on xxviii. 1), and the fol-
lowing phrase, ‘in the hand,’ to
be a metaphor =‘under the Divine
protection’ (comp. xlix. 2). But
this is farfetched, nor is there any
allusion in the context to the
dangers of the new Jerusalem.
Jehovah is pictured as holding

the crown in his hand to exhibit
it to the admiring world (Ew.,
Del.). In the open hand]
Comp. Bonomi, Nineveh, p. 191,
where the guests at a banquet hold
their drinking-vessels in the deeply
hollowed palms of their hands.

4 For the present Jehovah re-
serves the mystic name of the
new Jerusalem to himself. But the
prophet is allowed to mention two
inferior, every-day names which
may appropriately be used, the one
for Jerusalem, the other for the land
of Israel. By an odd coincidence,
the name which is now repudiated
for Jerusalem—Forsaken (Hebr.
Azubah)—is also the name of the
mother of the pious Jehoshaphat
(1 Kings xxii. 42), while that which
is adopted in its place—Well-
pleasing (Hebr. Hephzibah)—is
that of the mother of the idolatrous
Manasseh (2 Kings xxi. 1).

5 For as a young man... ]
An explanation of the new names
in v. 4. Asa young man marries a
virgin, so shall the restored Jewish
exiles take possession of their terri-
tory ; and as a bridegroom rejoices
over his bride, so shall Jehovah
rejoice over his erring but repent-
ant people (comp. |. 1), The ex-
pression thy sons shall marry
thee, is less strange in Hebrew
than in English, the word for ‘to
marry’ being properly ‘to be lord
over,’

CHAP. LXIL.] ISAIAH. 99

5 Upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, I have set watchers ; all
day and all night they are never silent: ye that are Jehovah’s
remembrancers, take ye no rest; 7and give no rest to him,
until he establish and until he make Jerusalem a renown in
the earth. ®Sworn hath Jehovah by his right hand, and by
his strong arm, Surely I will no more give thy corn for food
to thy enemies, and strangers shall not drink thy grapes, for
which thou hast laboured ; ° for they who have garnered it
shall eat it and praise Jehovah, and they that gathered it

together shall drink it in my holy courts.
10 Pass ye, pass ye through the gates ; clear ye the way of

6 vpon thy walls] The walls are
those of which we have heard in
xlix. 16 as being ‘continually be-
fore’ Jehovah ; the Jerusalem is
the ideal or supersensible one (not
the less real because ideal)—see
on xl. 9. The ‘ watchers’ therefore
are not prophets (Knob., Del.), but
angelic beings (Targ., Ew., Hahn,
Seinecke). Their function is to
‘remind’ Jehovah, not of human
sin (1 Kings xvii. 18) and infirmity
(Jobi. 11, ii. 5), but of his covenant-
promise to protect his people, and
we have perhaps a sample of their
intercession in li. 9, 10 (see note on
‘ Awake, awake’). They are thus
analogous to that ‘angel of Jeho-
vah’ in Zech. i. 12, who intercedes
for mercy for Jerusalem and the
cities of Judah, and perhaps to
the friendly angel-mediator in Job
xxxili. 23. We have met with these
‘watchers’ before (a synonymous
word is used) in lii. 8 (see note),
where they give notice of the ap-
proach of Jehovah with the return-
ing exiles. In Daniel, too (e.g., iv.
13), and in Enoch (e.g., i. 5), the
angels are called ‘watchers’ (Hebr.
‘irim, FEthiop. 2gihan, i.e. vigéles),
and there is a special class of
angels called ¢éypyyopo. in the
Testaments of the Twelve Patri-
archs. More distant, but not the
less genuine, is the relation of the
phrase to the mapdkAnros of the
Johannine Gospel.—But who is it
that declares, ¥ have set watchers?
Surely not the prophet, even grant-
ing that the ‘ watchers’ themselves

are prophets (Knob.). Who but
Jehovah could commission either
angelic or prophetic watchers?
(So Del.)

8,® Perhaps Jehovah’s reply to
the intercession of the ‘remembran-
cers’; at the same time a special
supplement to the promise in wv.
2-5. The prophet is thinking of
those many disturbed periods in
Israel’s history, from the times of
the Judges onwards, when the
harvest and the vintage were pil-
laged by foreign hordes (comp.
Judg. vi. 4, 11, Isa. i. 7, xvi. 9).

° In my holy courts] Lowth
and Ges. see here a reference to
the rules about the tithes and
firstfruits, which were to be eaten
‘before Jehovah’ (Deut. xii. 17, 18,
xiv. 23-26). But the whole of the
harvest could not be eaten in the
courts of the temple! The expres-
sion is figurative, like ‘to dwell, to
worship, in Jehovah’s house’ (Ps.
v. 7, xv. I, &c.), for ‘to hold com-
munion with Jehovah, and simply
means ‘ shall eat and drink praising
Jehovah,’ which indeed is the very
phrase used in the parallel line.
(So Diestel.)

10-12 The prophet returns to the
exiles in Babylon, and urges them
not to delay their homeward march.
It is the same call which sounded in
the two former divisions of the pro-
phecy (xlviii. 20, lii. 11). Clear
ye the way] An imaginative direc-
tion to Jehovah’s invisible servants
(so xl. 3, lvii. 14). It is tantamount
to a prophecy such as xi, 16.——

H2

100 ISAIAII. [CHAP. LXIIL.

the people; cast ye up, cast ye up the highway ; take ye
out the stones ; lift ye up a banner over the peoples. | Be-
hold, Jehovah causeth it to be heard unto the end of the
earth ; say ye unto the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy Salva-
tion cometh; behold, his wage is with him, and his recom-
pence before him. 'And men shall call them, The holy
people, Jehovah’s released ones; and thou shalt be called

Sought out, City not forsaken.

Over the peoples] i.e., high above
them, so as to be seen far and wide.
The ‘peoples’ are the Gentiles who
are to escort the Jewish exiles ;
comp. xlix. 22, xi. 10, 12.

1 Causeth it to be heard] viz.,
as appears from the sequel, the
news of the imminent deliverance
of Israel (as xlviiil. 20).——Say ye

This is a fresh summons,
and is not to be included in the
utterance to ‘the end of the earth’
—for what object could there be in
enlisting the most remote nations
in the service of Zion? No; the
‘daughter of Zion’ is in captivity

either supersensible beings (comp.
li. 7, 8) or the prophets addressed
in xl. 1. The misunderstanding of
the critics is caused by the crowd-
ing of thoughts in the prophet’s
joyfully excited mind. Behold,
his wage . . . ] Repeated from xl.
10.— The holy (i.e., consecrated)
people] Such they were destined
to be (Ex. xix. 6), though the ideal
was but most imperfectly realised.
But now the real and the ideal are
one.—Sought out] i.e., eagerly
cared for. A contrast to Jer. xxx.
17, ‘She is Zion; no man seeketh
her out.’

in Babylonia. Her heralds are

CHAPTER LXIII. 1-6.

THESE six verses are entirely detached both from the foregoing and
from the following prophecy, and ought to have formed a chapter by
themselves. They contain a lyrico-dramatic dialogue (which reminds us
of that in Ps. xxiv. 7-10) between the prophet as a bystander anda
victorious warrior (i.e. Jehovah) returning from the field of battle in
Idumea.

‘This highly dramatic description,’ according to Ewald,! ‘unites depth
of emotion with artistic perfection, and reproduces a genuine prophetic
vision.” Certainly there is a wonderful forcefulness of phrase, and pic-
torial power, in this brief prophecy, though it is impossible to read it
without shuddering (with reverence be it said) at the vehement indigna-
tion which it expresses. No wonder that it drew the attention of the
seer of Patmos, who interwove some of its striking phrases in one of
the sublimest but most awful passages of the Apocalypse (xix. 13, 15),
Ewald then goes on to state one of his bold critical conjectures, viz., tha
Ixiii. 1-6, together with chap. lviii. and lix. 1-20, is the work of a fresh
writer, distinct from the prophet who composed the greater part of
{I. Isaiah. I do not here discuss this view as a critical hypothesis, and

1 Die Propheten, iii. 119.

CHAP. LXIL.J ISAIAII. lo!

merely mention it as a symbol of the striking impression made upon
Ewald by the literary affinities of these prophecies, especially Ixiii, 1-6
and the imaginative description in lix. 15 4-20.! These affinities exist,
and are of some importance to exegesis, as it follows from them—1. that
at any rate chap. lix. and lxiii. 1-6 were occasioned by the same contem-
porary circumstances, and 2. that the subject of the latter prophecy is
the same as that of the description in lix. 15 5-20, viz., a theophany, 1.e.,a
divinely ordained turn in the fortunes of Israel. When, therefore, Mr. Row
(refining upon the well-known patristic interpretation) supposes ” that the
mysterious warrior in lxiii. 1-6 is Israel—not indeed Israel as he is, but
idealised into a being of a nature chiefly divine but partly human, he can
be at once refuted by pointing to lix. 15, where the warrior is expressly
affirmed to be Jehovah. Mr. Row’s mistake is probably caused by his
unquestioning acceptance of the division into chapters. For in the first
six verses Israel is completely in the background ; it is only at v. 7 that
the hopes and fears of God’s covenant-people begin to find expression.
It may not be superfluous to add, that there is this marked difference
between Jehovah, as described in the prophecies, and Jehovah’s Servant,
that the one can employ violent means, when he thinks it necessary or
expedient, while the other is throughout represented as employing moral
means, and as being rewarded by Jehovah for his self-sacrifice.

Modern critics in general, both Roman Catholic* and Protestant,
deny at any rate that the primary reference of the prophecy is to the
personal Servant of Jehovah. Calvin long ago put this view with a clear-
ness and a force which leave nothing to be desired ; he calls the tradi-
tional Christian interpretation a violent wresting of the prophecy, which
simply declares in figurative terms that God will interpose for His people.
The only doubt is whether Edom is to be taken literally or symbolically ;
whether, that is, the calamity described means only the general judgment
upon the world, or (which is equally probable, comp. Mal. i. 3) a special
visitation of Edom; or whether, again, we may combine these views.
Our conclusion upon this point will depend on the opinion we have
formed of the parallel prophecy in chap. xxxiv.

It is certainly a strange phenomenon, this reference to a great battle-
field in Edom, when the grand object of II. Isaiah is to help the Jews
to realise their coming deliverance from Babylon. It creates a serious
difficulty for those who maintain that II. Isaiah was written at one time
and under one set of impressions. The complications of the problems of
Biblical criticism are only beginning to be adequately realised.

'«Who is this that cometh from Edom, in bright-red gar-
ments from Bozrah ? this that is splendid in his raiment, that

* That cometh from Edom] battle which chiefly excites the
From this it would appear that the writer’s interest has been in Edom.

4 Observe that one verse is almost identical in both prophecies (comp. Ixiii. 5 with
lix. 16). :
2 The Fesus of the Evangelists, p. 163.

3 E.g., the two recent Rom, Cath. commentators, Rohling and Neteler see Naeg.'s
introduction to lxiii, 1-6).

102

ISAIAH.

(CHAP. LXIII

“marcheth along®* in the fulness of his strength?’ ‘I am
one that speak in righteousness, that am mighty to save.’
2« Why is there red on thy raiment, and thy garments like his

that treadeth in the wine-press ?’

3« The wine-trough I have

® So Vulg., Lo., Kr., Gr. (easy emendation).-—TEXT, Tossing (his head), Ges.,
Naeg. ; or, bending to and fro, Del. ; or, stretching himself out, Ew.

In vv. 3, 6, however, a subsequent
encounter is referred to, in which
‘the peoples’ (or ‘ peoples,’ for the
article is not expressed), i.e., the
mass of the Gentile world, feel the
weight of the mighty warriors
hand. They are cursed, like Meroz
(Judg. v. 23), because ‘they came
not to the help of Jehovah.’ Thus
the national judgment upon Edom
is presented as an earlier stage
of the great world-judgment (see
introd. to chaps. xxiv.-xxvii.).
In bright-red garments} There
is a doubt whether red is mentioned
as the proper colour of a soldier’s
dress (comp. Nah. il. 3), or as indi-
cating the slaughter in which the
hero has been engaged (v. 3). Some
have felt that there would be an
incongruity in the description if a
blood-stained robe were called
‘splendid.’ Yet the second is the
more natural view (comp. Rev. xix.
13). It represents the warrior as
‘con segno di vittoria incoronato,’
as Dante has it in a partly parallel
passage ;' and the stress laid upon
the shedding of blood in v. 3 sug-
gests that the writer himself saw
nothing discreditable in the cir-
cumstances. —— That marcheth
along] I cannot agree with Dr.
Weir that Del.’s explanation is
absurd ; the emotional expressions
uf more primitive races may appear
strange, but we ought to take ac-
countof them in interpreting ancient
writers. The rend. of Gesenius,
however, is preferable, if we do not
accept the emendation. The tone
of this passage reminds us of xlii.
13, 14; comp. also Ps, Ixxiv. 3,
Lift up thy steps (O Jehovah !)
to the everlasting ruins,’ i.e., ad-
vance in long, swift steps. Iam
one that speak... ] The warrior

himself answers with far-echcing
voice (for he is seen at a distance,
as Del. subtly remarks). ‘ Speak-
ing’ is mentioned, to recall the
numerous prophecies which had
announced this great display of
righteous wrath and equally right-
eous love: Jehovah is as mighty in
word as in act. ‘Righteousness’
is not synonymous with ‘truth,’
‘veracity, but, as so often in II.
Isaiah, the fidelity of God to His
revealed principles of action—
Why is there red...] The
speaker is evidently surprised at
this red appearance ; it is acci-
dental, and not the proper colour of
the dress (see above). The Hebr.
word for ‘red’ (ad6nz) suggests the
thought of Edom, and from the
sequel we may infer that the name
of Bozrah suggested the figure of
the vintage (da¢zr), the names of
countries or cities being regarded
as emblematic of their fortunes.
The wine-press, too, as De Saulcy
shows, appears as an emblem on
the coins of Bostra during the
Roman rule. Seir was a vine-
country.

8’ fhe wine-trough I have
trodden] The warrior accepts the
metaphor, which indeed is a stand-
ing equivalent for the carnage of
battle (Joel iii. 13, Lam. i. 15, Rev.
xiv. 18-20).——of the peoples
there was no man...]| The
nations of the world (at any rate,
those in the neighbourhood of
Israel) are regarded as a single
body ; they are in fact united by a
common fear and hatred of Jeho-
vah (Ps. ii. 2). Hence ‘no man.’
——SoItrodethem...] The
‘ wine-trough’ was meant for Jeho-
vah’s enemies and those of his
faithful people; but there was no

} Inferno, iv. 54.

CHAP. LXIII.] ISAIAH. 103

trodden alone, and of the peoples there was no man with
me; so I »trode them in mine anger, and trampled them in
my fury; and their life-stream besprinkled® my garments,
and all my raiment have I defiled. 4 For a day of vengeance
was in my heart, and ‘my year of release* was come. ° And
I looked, but there was no helper, and was stupefied, but
there was no supporter ; therefore mine arm wrought salva-
tion for me, and my fury—it supported me; ®and I 4stamped
upon the peoples in mine anger, and * broke them to pieces ¢

in my fury, and ‘spilled their life-stream on the ground.’

>b Will tread... willtrample...
Auth. Vers., Kay, Naeg. (see crit. note).

shall besprinkle, Vowel-points, Targ., Calv.,

© So Sept. (omitting ‘ my’), Pesh., Vulg., Ges., Hitz., Del, Naeg.—The year of

my released ones, Ew., &c.

(But see lxi. 2.)

4 Will stamp, Vowel-points, Targ., Calv., &c.—Stamp, Ew.
¢ So Cappel, Lowth, Hitz., Knob.—Will break them in pieces, Many Hebr. MSS.,
Targ.—Break them in pieces, Ew.—Will make them drunk, Received text, Calv., &c.—

Made them drunk, Sept., Vulg., Vitr., Ges., Luzatto, Del.

(The letters, which alone

properly form the text, leave the tense of the rendering open.

f Will spill, Vowel-points, Targ., Calv.,

fatal decree binding the Gentile
nations to persist in their hostility.
Any one of them might have sepa-
rated itself from the rest. But, as
no such separation occurred, the
Divine warrior took summary ven-
geance upon them all. Their
life-stream] Lit., ‘their juice’
(Kimchi, less suitably, ‘their
vigour’). Comp. Ps. xxxii. 4,
‘my sap (a synonymous word) was
turned into the drought of summer.’
—Obs., it is his enemies’ blood, and
not his own, with which the dress
of the herois stained. For it is ‘a
more than man’ (/@’7sh, xxxi. 8) who
goes to war, and a heavenly sword
(xxxiv. 5) which cuts down the
foe.

4 A day of vengeance ... my
year of release] Comp. on Ixi. 2.
‘Vengeance’; as lix. 17, Xxxv. 4.
‘Was in my heart] i.e., was
in my intention (as x. 7).—Obs.,
vu. 4 places us at the moment pre-
ceding the act of vengeance; v. 5
describes the internal debate of

&e.

the hero ; vw. 6, the deed which fol-
lowed, contemporaneous evidently
with uv. 3. ‘Release’ suggests the
object of the Divine intervention ;
it was to procure the release of
Jehovah’s people. Alt. rend. is
equally admissible, and in fact
more obvious, but does not make
such a good parallel to ‘a year of

vengeance.’
> And I looked... ] See note
onl. 2. The first part of the verse

is a free variation on lix. 16 a, Ezek.
xxii. 30 ; the second is a repetition
of lix. 16 4, with the change of
‘righteousness’ into ‘ fury,’ and the
third into the first person.

® Estampea] Auth. Vers., ‘I wili
tread down.’ But the verb is dif-
ferent from either of those used
in v. 2. There is the less wonder,
then, that in the next verb, broke
them to pieces, the figure of
the vintage is altogether deserted,
The common reading, ‘will make
(or made) drunk, is against the
parallelism.

104 ISAIAH. (CHAP. LXIIL,

CHAPTERS LXIII. 7-LXIV.

Contents.—A thanksgiving, confession of sin, and supplication, which
‘the prophet puts into the mouth of the Church of the Exile, or rather
prays out of their heart’ (Del.), for he thoroughly identifies himself with his
people.—The chapter (for such it virtually is—see on Ixiv, 1) falls naturally
into a number of short paragraphs. In the first (Ixiii. 7-9), the tone is
that of thanksgiving, in accordance with the beautiful custom of the
Psalmists to interlace supplication and praise ; in the second (vv. 10-14)
the prophet turns to Israel’s ingratitude and rebellion, but forgets not to
record his people’s ‘remembrance’ of Jehovah’s past mercies, a remem-
brance which is the first step to the recovery of prosperity (on this
characteristic retrospect see note on v. 11); in the third (vv. 15-19) the
Church supplicates Jehovah, as being still the ‘father’ of his people, to
‘look upon’ its distress ; in the fourth (Ixiv. 1-5 a) it ventures further, and
utters a deep longing for a theophany, nothing short of which will touch
the root of its misery ; in the fifth and last (vv. 5 6-11) it puts forth a
humble confession of its utter unworthiness, and again bases its plea for
help on the fatherly relation of Jehovah, and on the desolate condition of
his chosen land and habitation. The manner is that of a liturgical
psalm ; the prophet, as it were, leads the devotions of the assembled
Church. The tone reminds us strongly of the Lamentations ; the deso-
lation of the temple and of the Jewish cities (Ixiii. 18, Ixiv. 10, 11) are
described with all the emotion of a contemporary. Shall we refer this
to the mighty force of an ecstatic vision? Or is the prophet a contem-
porary of the Jewish exiles? And if so, when and where did he write?
Such are the difficult questions which meet the interpreter, but which, as
interpreter, it is not his function to answer. He has indeed difficulties
enough of his own in this chapter, the style of which is unusually abrupt,
and the text not always handed down with perfect accuracy.

7 Jehovah’s loving-kindnesses will I celebrate, Jehovah's
deeds of renown, according to that which is due for all that
Jehovah hath bestowed upon us, and the abundant goodness
toward the house of Israel, which he hath bestowed upon
them, according to his compassion and according to his
abundant loving-kindnesses. * He said, Surely they are my
people, sons that will not play the liar, and he became unto

7 Loving-kindnesses| Sec on lv.
3. Deeds of renown] Lit., ‘ re-
nowns ; as in vw. 15, ‘mights’=
‘acts of might (or, of heroism),
and, in Ixiv. 6 ‘righteousnesses’ =
‘righteous deeds.’

® we said ..] The retrospect

of the prophet or the Church begins
with the original covenant between
Jehovah and Israel, and the first
great deliverance from Egypt (comp.
Ex. ii. 24, iii. 7). —-Sons] Remind-
ing us of i, 2, 4.

CHAP. LXIIL.J

them a saviour.

ISAIAH.

105

9Tn all their distress *e was distressed *,

and the angel of his Face saved them ; in his love and in his
clemency he himself released them ; and he took them up

and carried them all the days of old.

10 But they defied and

grieved his Spirit of holiness; so he changed for them into

2 So Hebr. marg. and most moderns.—There was no (real) affliction, Ges.; he
was not an adversary, De Dieu, Dathe, Kay (both possible renderings of the text-
reading).—The versions agree with the Hebr. text in reading the negative particle.

®° In all their distress] The
wanderings in the desert are re-
ferred to.— He was distressed
i.e, he himself sympathised with
them. Comp. Judg. x. 16, ‘His
(Jehovah’s) soul was impatient for
the misery of Israel. Against the al-
ternative reading (which is difficult
to construe), see Ps. cvi. 44, ‘He
regarded (them) in their distress.’
Occurring as this does in a context
closely related to II. Isaiah, it may
not unfairly be viewed in the light
of an interpretation. The early cri-
tics stumbled (but see St. Jerome’s
note) at the somewhat unusual
position of 76 (regarded as a pre-
position and suffix)——'The angel
of his Face] No doubt this is a
synonymous phrase for ‘the angel
of Jehovah, and there may be an
allusion to the promise in Ex. xxiii.
20-23, ‘Behold, I send an angel
before thee, &c. But the novelty
of the phrase invites further inquiry.
Ewald! considers it to be a meta-
phorical equivalent for the angel
constantly in waiting for the com-
mands of the heavenly King. But
il seems to be certain that the ex-
pression ‘the Face (or, the Name)
of God’ is not merely metaphorical,
but a common mythic phrase of the
early Semites for the self-manifest-
ing aspect of the Divine nature
(comp. on xxx. 27, lix. 19), and that
when the later Old Testament
writers discarded mythic phraseo-
logy, they gave a similar content to
the term ‘angel.’ In the phrase,
‘the angel of his Face,’ we seem to
have a confusion of two forms of
expression incident to a midway
stage of revelation. His clem-
ency] Indicating that Jehovah had

much to forgive. He took them
up] Comp. xl. 11, xlvi. 3, 4 (note).
10 But ¢iey defied and grieved
] The contrast involved in the
pronouns ‘he’ and ‘they’ reminds
us of the similar antithesis in chap.
liii—It is probably the religious
and political decline of Israel, as
represented in the Book of Judges,
to which the prophet refers in this
clause :—comp. the familiar phrase,
‘And the children of Israel again
did evil in the eyes of Jehovah’
(Judg. ii. 11, iii. 7, &c.). The same
combination of verbs (‘ defied’ and
‘ grieved’ occurs again in Ps. Ixxviii.
4o ; and the former of these verbs,
in conjunction with ‘his Spirit’ (i.e.,
the Spirit of Jehovah, not that of
Moses), in Ps. cvi. 33 (comp. v. 43).
His Spirit of holiness] It
would be dangerous to attempt a
‘ Theology of II. Isaiah,’ but there
is evidently a tendency in this book
to hypostatise the Divine Spirit
(which it mentions no less than
seven times) with special distinct-
ness. The author has already
claimed to have been sent in
personal union with the Spirit of
Jehovah (see on xlviii. 16); he now
employs another phrase (comp. v.
14) which could not have been
used, except of a person. From the
connection of this verse with the
preceding we may, I think, infer
that ‘his Spirit (of holiness)’ is
virtually equivalent to ‘the Angel’
or ‘the Face’ of Jehovah ; and the
same conclusion may be reached
(see below) by comparing the last
clause of the next verse with Ex.
xxxili. 14. Another slight coinci-
dence may confirm this view. The
word in Ex. xxiii. 21 rendered in

t Die Lehre der Bibel von Gott, ii. 289.

106 ISATAII. [CHAP. LXIUI.

an enemy, he himself fought against them. "Then Phe
remembered the days of old”; ‘Where is he that * brought
them up out of the sea with the shepherds® of h's flock?

> His people remembered the ancient days of Moses, Saadya, Rashi, Ges., Hitz.,
Ew., Del., Naeg.—He (Israel) remembered the days of old (and) the deliverer of his
people (viz. Jehovah), Horst, Stier. (This rend. is mentioned by A. E., and approved,
though not adopted, by Ges.)

© So, many Hebr. MSS. (including two of great value at St. Petersburg and two
at Erfurt) and editions, Vulg., Kimchi, Vitr., Del.—Brought them up. . . with the
shepherd, Received text.—Brought up out of the sea the shepherd, Sept., Pesh.,

Targ., three Hebr. MSS. (two of some importance), Naeg.

Auth. Vers. ‘provoke’ is cognate
with the word here rendered ‘de-
fied, and the accusative to the verb
in Ex. Zc. is the ‘Angel’ of whom
it is said, ‘My Name (= Face) is
in him.’ Comp. also iii. 8 ‘to defy
the eyes of his glory’ (=‘to defy
his Face’).—The phrase ‘ Spirit of
holiness’ is particularly appropriate
here, as the ‘defiance’ of the Jews
consisted in their transgressing that
religious covenant, fidelity to which
constituted Israel’s ‘holiness.’ In
fact, the phrase was not improbably
coined for vv. 10, II, as it only
occurs again in Ps, li. (see v. 11, or
in the Hebr. 12), a psalm probably
written by one already acquainted
with II. Isaiah. —- So he changed
... ] For ‘his name is Jealous,’
Ex. xxxiv. 14. He himself |
Although their Father, full of ‘love
and clemency.’

1" The pressure of a calamity
excites a longing for the return of
the good old days. He remem-
bered] viz., the people; comp.
‘withinhim.” This ‘remembering’
is a characteristic feature of the
later Psalms; see Ps. Ixxviil. 35,
Ixxvii. 11, cv. 5, cxlili. 5 (and so
Deut. xxxil. 7). When man ‘re-
members,’ a corresponding ‘change
of mind’ seems, to human expe-
rience, to be wrought in God;
comp. Ps. Ixxviil. 39, cvi. 45 (and
the parallel in Lev. xxvi. 45). It
may also be remarked that the
point of view of edification pre-
dominates in Hebrew historical
literature from the time of the Cap-
tivity onwards ; in their studies as
well as in their prayers these earnest
Jewish believers ‘remembered.’—
Of the lext-reading it seems to me

impossible to give a natural transla-
tion. I must still, however, agree
with Gesenius (in a note appended
to his translation of Isaiah, and
very generally overlooked) that ‘if
the text is correct, the explanation
of Horst (1823) deserves particular
attention, according to which m-
sheh is taken appellatively’ (see
above). In this case there is per-
haps an allusion to the Hebrew
etymology of Moses (Ex. ii. 10),
and we might render (asin /. C. 4.,
p. 221), ‘the (true) Moses of his
people.’ I confess, however, that
this now appears to me too abstruse
an expression and too subtle a
thought for such a context. In his
Commentary, Gesenius suggests
that ‘Moses’ (#z0zheh) is a marginal
gloss which has intruded into the
text. But this is not an adequate
remedy ; we have still to account
for the unnatural position of ‘his
people’ (‘azz20). The Sept. omits
both words, and Dr. Weir remarks,
‘It would almost seem as if they
were a marginal gloss, afterwards
introduced into the text, ‘‘ Moses”
perhaps explanatory of “shepherd
of his flock,” and “his people” of
“his flock” or “within him”? for,
perhaps still better, as a subject
to the verb ‘remembered’}.
Where is he. . . ] Here begins
a series of questions, reminding us
of those in li. 9, 10, —- With the
shepherds of his earn (* With’

= ‘under the conduct of These
additional words seem to follow
rather awkwardly, and I can under-
stand Naeg.’s preference for a sim-
pler reading (see above). ' Still the
parallel of Ps. Ixxvii. 20, ‘ who led-
dest thy people like sheep by the

CHAP. LXUL] ISALAII. 107
where is he that placed within him his Spirit of holiness ?
” He that caused his Arm of splendour to go forward at the
right hand of Moses, that cleft the waters before them, to
make unto himself an everlasting monument? ' He that
made them to go through the deeps, like horses through the
wilderness, without stumbling? Like the beast that gocth
down into the highland plain, the Spirit of Jehovah ¢ brought
them to rest‘; thus didst thou guide thy people, to make

unto thyself a monument of splendour. ™ Look from heaven
4 Led them, Sept., Pesh., Vulg., Targ., Lo., Ew. (another reading).

hand of Moses and Aaron,’ seems
to justify an adherence to the re-
ceived text (comp. also Num. xxxiil.
1). From Mic. vi. 4 it may perhaps
be inferred that popular tradition
gave a place to Miriam (called
‘the prophetess,’ Ex. xv. 20) among
the divinely appointed chiefs.
Where is he that placed... his
Spirit .. . ] That the Spirit of Je-
hovah was specially present among
the Israelites in their wanderings,
was the constant belief of the Bib-
lical writers. But what is more par-
ticularly involved in this belief? A
Levitical prayer in Neh. ix. (see v.
20) represents the operations of the
Spirit as didactic, but the aim of
the speaker or writer is here evi-
dently, not truthfulness of historic
colouring, but edification. Provi-
dential guidance and _ sagacious
government seem to be the benefits
primarily associated with the pre-
sence of the Spirit, or, as we may
also say (see above), the Face of
Jehovah. Hence we read inv. 14
‘the Spirit of Jehovah brought them
to rest,’ followed by ‘so didst thou
lead thy people’; hence Jehovah
declares to Moses, ‘My Face shall
go (with thee), and I will give thee
rest’ (Ex. xxxili. 14, comp. Hag. ii.
4, 5, Q. P. B.); and hence the
narrative in Num. xi. 10-30 ascribes
the endowment of the seventy
elders with the Spirit of Jehovah
to the inadequate provision for
the functions of government. The
qualifying term ‘of holiness’ is
neither otiose nor vague. It recalls
to mind (see on the same phrase in

v. 10) that the external prosperity
of the Israelites was due to the
fidelity of their God, and implies a
rebuke for their own infidelity. ——
Within him] viz., Israel, not merely
Moses (as Ges.), see last note.

12 His Arm of splendour] An-
other symbolic phrase nearly equi-
valent to ‘the Face of Jehovah’
(see on xl, 10). To go forward
at the right hand of Moses|
Ready to grasp him when he
stumbled, xli. 13 (Dr. Weir).
Who cleft the waters ... | Refer-
ring still, not to the Jordan, nor to
the rock in Horeb, but to the Red
Sea; comp. Ps. cvi. 9, Ixxvii. 16(17),
where ‘the deeps’ are mentioned,
as in v. 13———The wilderness|
ie., the uncultivated pasture-land.

13 That goeth down ]viz. fromthe
bare mountain-side. Brought
them to rest] ‘ Rest’ is a favourite
phrase for the state of the Israel-
ites in the land of Canaan after
their weary wanderings ; comp. Ex.
xxxlii. 14, Deut. iii, 20, xii. 9, Josh.
i, 13, xxll. 4, Ps. xcv. 11, and the
applications in Jer. xxxi. 2 (Q.P.B.),
Heb. iv. 1, 3, 9: ——Thus] Sum-
ming up the several stages of the
history.

15 Here, strictly speaking, chap.
lxiv. ought to begin : vv. 15-19 are
parallel to lxiv. 1-3.—It is difficult
to overrate the spiritual beauty of
the prayer contained in the former
passage. We may admit that the
most prominent motive urged by
the speaker has a nationalistic air,
but behind this, and strengthening
it, 1s his sense of the infiniteness of

108

ISAIAII,

(CHAP. LXIL.

and behold, from thy height of holiness and splendour.
Where are thy jealousy and thine acts of might? the sound-
ing of thy heart and thy compassions—° are they restrained

towards us °?

16 For thou art our Father, for Abraham taketh

© So Lo., Gr. ; Sept., Pesh., also have (me),—TExT, are restrained towards me

the Divine mercy, and of the strong
vitality of the union between Jeho-
vah and his people. Look from
heaven] As if Jehovah had given
up caring for his people, and with-
drawn into his heavenly palace.
This bold apostrophe reminds us
of a similar outburst of the prophet-
poet of the middle ages :—

E se licito m’ é, 0 sommo Giove,
Che fosti in terra per noi crucifisso,
Son li giusti occhi tuoi rivolti altrove?

The peculiar Hebr. original occurs
again in Ps, Ixxx. 15 (A. V. 14), and
nowhere else. Dr. Weir adds, that
the whole of the psalm may be
compared with this section of the
prophecy. From thy height]
It is not s#zar6m, the usual word for
‘height, but #4727. The render-
ing seems to be established from
Assyrian (see crit. note). ‘Where
(is) thy jealousy] Jehovah seems
to have become callous to his
people’s need ; his ‘jealousy’ (see
on ix. 74) slumbers, and needs to
be ‘stirred up’ (xlii. 13, where, as in
this passage, it is combined with the
expression ‘heroism’ or ‘ manifes-
tation of might’).——'The sound-
ing of thy heart... ] A figure
for ‘sympathy’; comp. xvi. II
(note), Jer. xxxi. 20, xlviil. 36.

16 The Church’s warrant for her

appeal. For thou (only) art
our zotner] ‘Our father, as in
Ixiv. 8, and perhaps 1 Chron.

xxix. 10.—Not in the wide, spiritual
sense of the New Testament, but
as the founder and preserver of
the Israelitish nation (see Deut.
xxxii. 6), which henceforth (car-
rying out primitive legal concep-

tions) is under the fatria potestas.
This is the constant meaning of
the title ‘Father’ as applied to
Jehovah ; see e.g. Ex. iv. 22, Hos.
xi. I, Isa. i. 2, Jer. iii, 4, 19, xxxi.
9, 20, Mal. i. 6, ii. 10. The first
example of the individualising use
of the term is in Sirach xxiii. 1-4,
‘O Lord, Father and Governor
of my whole life... O Lord,
Father and God of my life.’ ?)
For Abraham taketh no notice
of us ... ] Two explanations are
open to us: 1. ‘Abraham and
Jacob, fathers according to the
flesh, are long since dead, and
know us no more, and cannot help
us. But Jehovah is the everlasting
Father and Redeemer of his people.’
So Dr. Weir, expressing (I believe)
the general view of commentators.
But let the reader ask himself,
Does this really explain the pas-
sage? Why should Abraham and
Israel be introduced in this con-
nection? Is it not a platitude to
say that the remote ancestors of
the Jews cannot help them, unless
—and this is the second of our
theories—there was some chance,
from the popular point of view
(and obs., the prophet ts speaking
zn the name of the people), that they
might both sympathise and power-
fully co-operate with their descend-
ants—unless, in short, they were
regarded somewhat as demigods
(comp. the Homeric poems), or
patron-saints, or the angelic ‘ holy
ones’ in a speech of Eliphaz the
Temanite (Job v. 1)?? It was
Ewald who first pointed out some
traces of such a popular belief in
the Old Testament writings, though

1 Comp, Wittichen, Dée /dee Gottes als des Vaters, Gottingen, 1865 ; Westcott,
The Epistles of St. Fohn (add. note on 1 John i. 2).

2

sympathise across the gulf of death.

* Of course it was only the patriarchs and great men who were expected thus to
The popular belief as to the relation of the

common dead to their descendants is shown in Job. xiv. 21, 22 (see Dillmann’'s note).

CHAP. LXIII.]

ISATAT.

109

no notice of us, and Israel doth not recognise us; thou, O
Jehovah, art our Father; ‘our Goel’ hath been thy name

from of old.

he does not call attention to it in
the present passage. The instances
which he quotes (not all of them,
I think, of equal value) are Jer.
xxxi. 15 (‘Rachel weeping for her
children’), Hos. xii. 4, 5 (A. V. 3,
4), Isa. xxix. 22, 23, Luke 1. 54, 55,
73, xvi. 22.1. Of these the first and
the last are the most striking ; the
passage from Hosea seems merely
to embody a typical interpretation
of the history of Jacob, and instead
of ‘with us’ we should, with some
ancient versions, read ‘with him’ ;
on Isa. xxix. 22, 23, I may refer to
my own note; Luke i. 54 probably
alludes to Isa. xliv. 2, while vv.
55, 73, expressly refer to the past.
But if there are only a few passages
alluding to this popular belief, we
need hardly be surprised ; it was
not the object 1 the sacred writers
to preserve material for archzolo-
gists. These few passages, however,
seem to me sufficiently conclusive.
They enable us moreover to account
for some remarkable statements in
later Jewish writings—statements,
be it said in passing, which render
it 2 prior? probable that germs of
the belief expressed in them would
be found in the earlier literature.
Among these may be mentioned
thevision of Jeremiah ‘ who prayeth
much for the dead’ (2 Macc. xv.
13, 14), and the Talmudic assump-
tion that the Messianic redemption
would be the recompence of the
merits of the patriarchs (especially
Jacob and Joseph), or of the
prayers of ‘ancient Rachel’? I
trust no reader will suppose that
there is anything derogatory to the
prophet in this view of his meaning.
The fearless security with which
the sacred writers employ popular
language is only adverse to a me-
chanical theory of inspiration, and
adds greatly to the interest of Bib-

17 Why dost thou make us to stray, O Jehovah,

lical studies. [The above stands,
with slight alterations, as it was
written several years ago. Since
then Dr. Goldziher has arrived
independently at a similar view.*
His opinion, however, is that the
prophet aims at overthrowing the
popular belief. This seems to me an
arbitrary conjecture. No evidence
in support of it can be gained from
the passage itself. The prophet
speaks in the name of the people,
and the analogy of passages (see
above) in which a controversial
intention cannot be supposed,
seems to me to be unfavourable
to Dr. Goldziher’s view. Indeed,
on reconsidering my note, it ap-
pears to me that the prophet is not
merely speaking dramatically for
the people, but expressing his own
beliefs. See Last Words on this
passage. | Israel] Sometimes
used as a synonym for ‘ Jacob’ in
the more solemn style; see 1 Kings
xviii. 36 ‘God of Abraham, Isaac,
and Israel.’ —— Our Goel... . from
of old] The history of Israel pre-
sented a continual succession of
‘captivities’ and deliverances (see
on xli. 14).

17 why dost thou make us to
stray ...] (Comp. Ixiv. 5, 7.)
It is as if the Jews would throw the
responsibility of their errors upon
Jehovah ; and this in spite of the
encouraging invitations contained
in this very book. They speak as
if it is not they who need to return
to Jehovah (lv. 7), but Jehovah who
is reluctant to return to them;
as if, instead of ‘feeding his flock
like a shepherd’ (xl. 11), he has
driven it out of the safe fold into
the ‘howling wilderness. But it
is only a temporary gloom which
has settled upon the Jewish be-
lievers. Depressed by melancholy,
they give way for the moment to

1 History of Israel, i. 296. We might add Mic. vii. 20.

2 See Rashi on Ixii. 6 and comp. Castelli, // Alessia secondo gli Ebre’, pp. 184-5.
See also below, on v. 17 4, and quotation from Targum, at end of note on lxiy. 5.

3 Hebrew Mythology, translated by Russell Martineau, p. 229.

110 ISAIAIIL. (CHAP. LXIIL

from thy ways, and harden our hearts so as not to fear thee ?
Return, for thy servants’ sake, the tribes of thine inheritance.
18 f For (but) a little while have they had possession of thy
holy mountain’: our adversaries have trampled upon thy
sanctuary. 18 We are become (like) those over whom thou

f (*‘Mountain’ is the reading of Sept., Lowth, Klostermann.) For a little while
have thy holy people possessed (the land, Vitr., Del, &c., or, thy sanctuary, Hitz.,
Knob.), Hebr, text, according to most.—They have been within a little (y of dis-
possessing thy holy people, Hebr. text, according to Luther, Lu., Kr., Seinecke,
Riehm.—For a little while have they (viz., thy servants, or, the enemies of Israel) had
possession of thy holy city, Weir (emendation)

& We are become as of old, when thou ruledst not over us, neither was thy name
called upon us, Sept., Vulg.—We were of old, before thou ruledst over them, &c.

Pesh.—We are thy people from of old, &c., Targ.

that these renderings approach the truth.)

those human ‘thoughts’ which are
not as ‘My thoughts’ (lv. 8).
Their question is a bold one, and
in other lips would be even blas-
phemous. But an ardent affection
tu their God underlies it. It is be-
cause the Divine power and help-
fulness has been so often proved
of old (v. 16), that Israel’s present
degradation seems so unintelligible.
The sense of sin, too, has deepened
during the Exile, and with it has
arisen a painful feeling of the in-
consistency of evil with the be-
neficent character of the Deity.!
Fundamentally opposedto Dualism,
the Jewish believers are involved
in a speculative problem which,
from the side of the intellect, they
are utterly powerless to explain
(comp. Rom. ix. 17-22). How can
Jehovah have rejected his people?
—this was their first difficulty, and
that which beset even the less re-
ligious minds among the exiles.
How can God be the author of sin?
this is the added sting to true
believers. From thy ways] i.c,
from thy righteous rules of life
(xiv. 5). And harden our
hearts] See on vi. 10. Return]
Jehovah had turned away in dis-
pleasure ; comp. Ps. Ixxx. 14
(quoted by Dr. Weir). For thy
servants’ sake] ‘Thy servants’
are not Israel’s ‘fathers’ or fore-
fathers (Ibn Ezra and Kimchi,

1 Comp. /. C. 4., p. 224.

(Dr. Weir doubtfully suggests

following the Targum,? in the face
of v. 16), but those Jews who are
still worthy of the title of ‘Jeho-
vah’s servants’ and are therefore
competent to receive the promised
blessings. In the parallel line they
are called the tribes of thine
inheritance. This is not merely
a consecrated phrase, but the lan-
guage of faith. Jehovah knows his
own, however widely the tribes of
Israel may be dispersed.

18 For (but) a little while] It is
a ‘pathetic fallacy.’ The tedious-
ness of the Exile (see on xlii. 14)
made the preceding period of
national independence seem but
too short.——Thy holy moun-
tain] (Same phrase in lvii. 13.)
This phrase considerably dimi-
nishes the harshness of the re-
ceived text, as it provides the verb
in the first line with an accusative.
(The subject of the verb is, of
course, ‘thy servants,’ v.17.) Alt.
rend., it is true, does even more
than this, for it brings the verb in
the first line into parallelism with
that in the second. But the rend.
‘within a little’ has no analogy,
and besides it is difficult to think of
the pre-Exile Israelites as a ‘holy
people,’ which would seem to be a
title specially reserved for the re-
generate Israel (Ixii. 12, comp. iv. 3).

we have become (like)
those ...] The meaning of this

2 It is a favourite idea of the Targum (see Ps. Ix. 6, 7, Ixxxiv. x1), and of the
Talmud, that the redemption of Israel will be accorded to the merits of ‘the fathers.

CHAP. LXIV.]

ISAIAIL.

IIT

hast never ruled, upon whom thy name hath never been

called.

LXIV. !Oh that thou didst rend the heavens, that thou
didst come down, that the mountains shook at thy presence,
*as when a fire of brushwood kindleth; to make thy name
known to thine adversaries, so that nations trembled before
thee, “while thou didst terrible things which we hoped not
for: [that thou didst come down, that the mountains ™ shook

b Flowed, Sept., Vulg., Ew., Stier, Weir, Naeg.
i TExT inserts, (as when) fire causeth water to boil, (Evidently a gloss.)

half-verse is very uncertain. The
omission of ‘like’ constitutes a
serious difficulty in the ordinary
rendering.——Thou hast never
ruled] (Comp. the complaint of
the Church in xxvi. 13 @.) The
theocratic covenant was regarded
as a pledge of the indestructibility
of the Jewish state. Other nations
may have Baal, Chemosh, Asshur,
for their king; Israel alone can
say ‘Jehovah is our King’ (xxxiil.
22). The prophets admit the jus-
tice of the popular belief ; only they
emphasise the moral conditions on
which alone security and deliver-
ance can be_ enjoyed. Thy
name] The ‘calling’ of the ‘name’
of Jehovah upon Israel gave a mys-
tic union to the two parties ; comp.
xliii. 7, Ixv. 1, Deut. xxviii. 10, Jer.
x1v. 9.

1-8 These verses are parallel to
Ixiii. 15, but grander and bolder.
There the prophet in the name of
the Church petitioned that Jehovah
would look down on the misery of
his people. Here, a look is felt to
be sufficient, so widely yawns the
gulf between Israel and his God.
A revelation on the largest possi-
ble scale is necessary to smite down
unbelief and annihilate opposition ;
God Himself must appear (Naeg.).
—In the modern editions of the
Hebrew Bible, the verse which, in
the printed editions of the ancient
as well as in the modern versions,
stands as lxiv. 1, forms the second
half of Ixiii, 19. The context is
obviously against separating this

(see above, on v. 16).

verse from the two following (our
lxiv. 2, 3), but the arrangement in
the Hebrew Bible may also perhaps
be taken as an unconscious protest
against the interruption of a pro-
phecy which is really a connected
whole (Ixili. 7-lxiv. 12).——That
thou didst rend the heavens]
God seems, in time of trouble, to
be separated by thick clouds (Job
xxii. 13, 14). But the Church
firmly believes that he will show
Himself again, and only wishes
that this most certain event had
already taken place. Hence the
perfect tense, ‘O that thou hadst
rent... hadst come down’ (so
literally).——rountains shook|
A frequent feature in the Biblical
theophanies; comp. Judg. v. 5,
Mic. i. 4, Hab. ili. 6, and especially
Ex. xix. 18. As when fire. . .]
To emphasise the foregoing state-
ment. Solid as the mountains
seem, they shall be as powerless
as so much brushwood or water to
resist the destructive influences of
Jehovah. To make thy name
known . . .] Name is not merely
character, but one special aspect of
the Deity (see on xxx. 27).

8 Terrible things] A standing
phrase (see Deut. x. 21, 2 Sam. vil.
23, Ps. cvi. 22) for the wonders of
the Exodus, to which later deliver-
ances are compared. ‘Which
we hoped not for] Exceeding our
wildest dreams, although, as the
next verse says, we had a right to
expect great things, on account of
the mighty exploits of Jehovah in

Vitringa compares the first of the eighteen Benedictions, but

khasdé there means, not ‘pious deeds’ (of the fathers), but ‘ promises’ (as lv. 3 4).

112 ISAIAH. [CHAP. LXIV.

at thy presence ;] ‘yea, from of old men have not heard, nor
perceived with the ear, (and) eye hath not seen, a God beside
thee, who doeth (so great things) for him that waiteth for
him! 5 Thou meetest * him who joyfully worketh righteous-
ness ; in thy ways they remember thee. Behold, thou wast
wroth, 'and we sinned!; ™* * *™ "and we went astray",
And we all became as one who is unclean, and all our
righteous deeds as a menstruous garment, and we all faded
away as the leaves, and our iniquities like the wind have
carried us away: ‘and there is none that calleth on thy name,

k O that thou wouldst meet, Ew. (similarly Stier).

1 So Hitz., Ew., Knob,, Naeg.—And we stood forth as sinners, Del.

m Therein (i.e., in our sins, or, in the tokens of thine anger) [have we been] a
long time, Ges., Del.—(Thou wast wroth) with them (i.e., the people) a long time,

Vitr., Ew.

" So Ew.—We fell away, Lowth (both Ew. and Lowth follow Sept.).—Hebr. text,
And shall we be delivered? Hitz., Del., Naeg.

the past. The concluding words
are probably, as Prof. Robertson
Smith has pointed out, repeated by
accident from v. I; the passage
gains greatly by their removal.

4 From of old men have not
heard. J The only living God
who, from the beginning of the
world, has proved himself to be
such by acts, is Jehovah. Who
doeth] The construction, ‘the
things which he prepareth’ (comp.
1 Cor. ii. 9) is too elliptical, and
the sense thus obtained does not
fit in well with the context, which
points to the present and not to any
future age, i.e. to God’s ‘doings’ in
history. That these ‘doings’ are
great, is understood of itself (see on
xliv. 23).

5 Thou meetest] Comp. Ps. ci.
2a. ‘Meetest’ in sucha way as to
leave no doubt of a Divine visit
(etymologically, strikest against).
Behold, thou wast wroth

.) Instead of this desired har-
mony, Jehovah has manifested his
displeasure, and the only conse-
quence has been (comp. v. 7 end,
and Ixiii, 17 @) that we sinned (or,
perhaps, went on sinning). For
Del.’s rend., comp. Gen. xliii. 9
Hebr. ; ‘and’ =‘so that, the ‘ vav
consecutive’ here expressing the
sequence of fact, and not of logic.
... and we went astray] This

portion of the verse is difficult in
the extreme (see crit. note) ; Del.’s
rend. is grammatically the safest,
but it is harsh, and interrupts the
parallelism. The paraphrase of
the Targum is interesting, as illus-
trative of the Jewish doctrine ot
merit, referred to on Ixiii, 16. It
runs, ‘ because of the works of our
righteous fathers which have been
from of old, we are delivered.’

®° and we all became] With
an emphasis on ‘all,’ even more
marked in the Hebr. than in liii. 6.
As one who is unclean] Like
the leper, who is excluded from
society (Lev. xiii. 44-46). The
people is personified as one man
(as i. 6). Our iniquities] The
word (‘avén) includes the idea of
punishment (see on iii. 6 4).—
Have carried us away] Into a
region where Jehovah’s presence is
not felt.

7 who stirreth up himself]
From the lethargy of the con-
science (same word in li. 17).——
Hast delivered us] The low ebb
of religion being ascribed (comp. v.
5 and xliii. 17) to Jehovah’s with-
drawal of his felt presence.——
Hand] i.e, ‘power, ‘sins’ being
personified as a tyrant seeking to
destroy. Comp. the whole passage
with Ezek. xxxiii. ro, ‘Thus ye
speak, saying, If our transgressions

CHAP. LXIV.] ISAIAH.

tr3
that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee; for thou hast
hid thy face from us, and hast ° delivered us° into the hand
of our iniquities.

8 And now, Jehovah, thou art our father ; we are the clay,
and thou our fashioner, and the work of thy hands are we all.
® Be not wroth, Jehovah, to the uttermost, and remember not
iniquity for ever: lo, do but look, we are all thy people.
10 Thy holy cities have become a desert ; Zion hath become

a desert, Jerusalem a desolation.

"Our house of holiness

and splendour, where our fathers praised thee, is burned up

with fire, and all our delectable things are laid waste.

2 Wilt

thou, in spite of these things, restrain thyself, Jehovah, keep.
ing silence, and afflicting us to the uttermost ?

° So Sept., Pesh., Targ., Lowth, Ew., Knob.—Made us to melt away (by means
of, or, into the hand of), Hebr. text, Vulg., &c, (unusual transitive use of the verb).

and our sins be upon us, and we
pine in them, how should we then
live ??

® The Church, in the boldness
of faith, has held up the mirror to
Jehovah. She has pointed out the
disastrous consequences of his pre-
sent inactivity, and sums up all her
longings in the pleading ejaculation,
And now (bad as our state is),
Jehovah, thou art our father;
this is the hope, which will bear
the full weight of our reliance.
The Church had indeed already
expressed this great truth (Ixiii. 16).
She now couples with it an appeal
to Jehovah’s reasonableness. Will
the potter lightly break a vessel on
which he has lavished his utmost
skill?—The same combination of
figures occurs in xlv. 9 (note).——
We ali] Unworthy as we are (see

vu. 6, 9). ;
10 Another motive for Jehovah’s
interference.—— Thy holy cities]

The phrase is remarkable; else-
where Jerusalem is ‘the holy city’
(xIviii. 2, ii. 1): Sept. and Vulg.
read ‘thy holy city.’ We find how-
ever ‘his holy border’ (Ps. Ixxviii.
54), and ‘the holy land’ (Zech. ii.
12, Hebr. 16).

‘1 Our house of holiness .. . ]
‘Our house,’ ie., that of which we
are so proud (comp. Matt. xxiii. 38).
Not ‘the house of our holiness,’ &c.,
for the ‘holiness’ and the ‘splen-
dour’ are Jehovah's (vii. 15, Ix. 7,
comp. Ixiii. 15). Obs. the emphasis
on praise ; comp. ‘who inhabiteet
(not the cherubim, but) the praises
of Israel’ (Ps. xxii. 3). Praise in-
deed includes prayer, Ps. Ixv. 1, 2.
——Allour delectable things]
The parallelism shows that this is
to be taken in a religious sense
(comp. xliv. 9), and the phrase
‘are laid waste,’ or ‘are laid low in
ruin’ (?khorbah, elsewhere only in
Jer., Ezek., and Lev. xxvi. 31, 33),
suggests that buildings are meant
—probably the temple and its con-
tents (hence ‘all...’). This is
confirmed by Joel iii. 5 (‘ my goodly
delectable things’ parallel to ‘my
silver and my gold’). In 2 Chron.
xxxvi. 19 the phrase is used, in con-
nection with the destruction of Je-
rusalem, of all artistic or precious
objects, sacred or otherwise.—To
illustrate this verse see introd. ta
chap. Ixvi.

™ Restrain thyself] See Ixiii,
15, xlii. 14 (note),

VOL, II.

114 ISATAH. [CHAP. LXv.

CHAPTER LXV.

Contents.—Alternate threatening and promise, the one addressed to a
polytheistic party, the other to true believers.

Most commentators regard this prophecy as the answer of Jehovah
to the foregoing prayer of the Church. This view is certainly plausible ;
such deep penitence and such earnest though struggling faith ought surely
to strike a responsive chord in the divine-human heart. Unfortunately,
it will not stand a critical examination ; at least, there are objections to
it, which have not yet been answered. The most serious one is this—that
the Divine speaker not only makes no recognition of the advances of his
penitent servants, but passes by without notice the grave religious pro-
blem by which they were harassed. The Church had complained that
Israel’s continuance in sin was itself a consequence of the withdrawal of
the Divine favour (see on Ixiv. 5). It is difficult to understand that the
only reply of Jehovah should be that he had always been ready to renew
his intercourse with his people (Ixv. 1). It would appear to follow from
this inconsistency that chap. lxv. was not originally intended to be the
sequel of chaps. lxili., Ixiv. There are also some other difficulties in the
way of admitting the ordinary view of commentators, though they touch
too closely on the domain of ‘ the higher criticism’ to receive a thorough
treatment here. They are such as these—that, while some passages
appear to presuppose the Exile as past, others refer to circumstances
characteristic of Jewish life in Canaan. The former are to be found in
vu. 11-25, ‘But as for you... that forsake my holy mountain’ (v. 11),
and ‘They shall not build, and another inhabit, &c. (v. 22) ; the latter
in vv. 3-5, 11, where some at least of the sins referred to belong dis-
tinctly to Palestinian idolatry, and in v. 8, which appears to contain a
quotation from a vintage-song. It is for criticism to say how these appa-
rently conflicting phenomena are to be accounted for ; but exegesis has
a right to point out that a chapter with such pronounced Palestinian
features can hardly have been intended as the sequel of Ixiii. 7-Ixiv., of
which the real or assumed standing-point is in the Babylonian exile.

'T have offered answers to those who have not asked; I
have been at hand to those who have not sought me: I have

1 ¥ have offered answers] Lit.,
*] allowed myself to be consulted’
(same idiom as in liii. 7, on which
see crit. note). The expression is
vague, and may mean either that
Jehovah was actually consulted (it
is the word for consulting an oracle),
or merely that He might have been.
The vowel-points (which are no
part of the text, but embody an
ancient interpretation) in the se-

cond half of the verse imply that
the Gentiles are the people referred
to, and consequently favour the
former view of the meaning. St.
Paul, too, following perhaps the
tradition of Gamaliel, applies the
passage to the conversion of the
Gentiles (Rom. x. 20), and most
Christian commentators have done
the same. The context, however,
is very decidedly against such a

’

CHAP. LXV.]

ISAIAH,

115

said, Here I am, here I am, unto a nation which hath not

* called upon * my name.

*I have spread out my hands all

the day unto an unruly people, who walk in a way which is
not good, after their own thoughts. * The people who irritate
me to my face continually, who sacrifice °in the gardens >,
and burn incense upon the bricks ; ‘who tarry in the graves

= So Sept., Pesh., Targ., Vulg., Lowth, Ew., Diestel.—Been called by, Vowel-
points, Ges., Del., &c. (unusual use of the conjugation),
> On (?) the roofs, Ew.

reference. There is no indication
that the prospects of the Gentiles
occupied the mind of the prophet
at this time. Thesins of the Jews,
committed against light and know-
ledge, must bring down upon them
a proportionately heavy punishment
—this is the burden of the section.
——Hath not called upon my
name] Comp. Ixiv. 7, xliii. 22. The
difficulties of alt. rend. are well
brought out by Del. (who however
adheres to it.)

? Ihave spread out my hands]
The gesture of prayer—what a con-
descension !——-Who walk] The
nation is not here personified—it is
the plural number in the Hebrew.

3 who sacrifice in the gar-
dens] This was a characteristic
sin of the pre-Exile period (Ivii. 5,
i, 29). Ew.’s correction (6aggag-
iy for daggannéth), anticipated

ut rejected by Vitr., is against
Hebr. usage, which requires the
preposition ‘a/,—— Upon the
bricks] i.e., upon the tilings of the
houses (2 Kings xxiii. 12, Zeph. i. 5,
Jer. xix. 13). Or, upon altars made
of bricks, which were contrary to
the Law (Ex. xx. 24, 25); but this
seems rather less probable, 1. be-
cause it implies an ellipsis, and 2.
because it points to Babylonia or
Egypt as the scene of the trans-
gression. The former view, imply-

ing Palestine as the locality, is.

more in harmony with the con-
text.

4 In the graves] The rock-graves
of Palestine with their distinct
chambers, supplied, and still sup-
ply,’ a comfortable resting-place on

emergencies. Of course, to lodge
in the houses of the dead involved
ceremonial impurity, but the con-
text shows that the persons spoken
of had cut themselves adrift from
the religion of Jehovah.—What
was the object of these visits to the
graves? Vitr. and Ges. think of
propitiatory sacrifices to the dead,
but the parallel passages (viii. 19,
xxix. 4) rather suggest necromancy.
Sept. already adopts this view, in-
serting the words & évimma (the
revelations being expected in
dreams). But the graves were, in
popular estimation, not only the
abodes of the dead, but those of
demons, or infernal deities or demi-
gods (comp. Matt. viii. 28, Mark v.
3). The revelations might therefore
be looked for from these, and the
offence against Jehovah would be
the greater. So Jerome, who ren-
ders the next line, ‘et in delubris (?)
idolorum dormiunt,’ commenting
thus, ‘ubi stratis pellibus hostiarum
incubare soliti erant, ut somniis
futura cognoscerent. Quod in fano
Esculapil usque hodieerrorcelebrat
ethnicorum multorumque aliorum.’
Comp. Virg. £7. vii. 87, &c.
In secret places] i.e., eitherin any
remote corner (Del., Naeg.), or in
the graves already spoken of, comp.
Job xl. 13, where ‘in the hidden
(place)’ is parallel to ‘in the dust
(of Shedl).’ ‘Who eat swine's
flesh] That is, in sacrificial meals,
as the context shows (comp. Ixvi,
17). The flesh of the swine was
forbidden by the Law (Deut. xiv.
8, Lev. xi. 7), not merely for die-
tetic reasons, but presumably

1 FE, von Orelli, Durth's Hetlige Land (Basel, 1879), p. 178.

12

116

ISAIATI.

[CHAP. Lxv:

and ‘in secret places* take up their lodging, who eat swine’s
flesh, and broth of abominations is in their vessels ; > who say,
Keep by thyself, do not come near me, for I 4am holy unto

thee 4!
day long.

These are a smoke in my nose, a fire burning all the
®§ Behold, it is written before me; I will not keep

¢ In the caves, Sept.
4 Make thee holy, Geiger.

from its connection with the myth
of Adonis, who was said to have
been killed by a wild boar in the
forests of Lebanon ; an additional
reason for the prophet’s indignation
is mentioned in the note on Ixvi. 3.
How loathsome swine’s flesh was
to pious Jews may be seen from the
narratives in 2 Macc. vi., vil. The
charge of eating it points on the
whole to Palestine rather than to
Babylonia as the country of the
offenders, for not even an allusion
to the swine has yet been found in
the cuneiform inscriptions. It is
true that, as Bochart remarks,!
‘there were no swine in Judza, as
long as the commonwealth of the
Jews stood:’ it was in a ‘far
country’ that the prodigal son was
sent into the fields to feed swine
(Luke xv. 13-15). But we know
that there were swine in Galilee in
our Lord’s time (Matt. viii. 30), and
that some at least of the Phoenicians
sacrificed swine (Lucian, de ded
Syrid, c. 54). Ewald points to the
mention of eating swine as con-
firming his view that these chapters
were written in Egypt ; but though
the swine does appear to have been
sacrificed in Egypt (Herod. ii. 47,
48), its flesh was ‘ forbidden to all
initiated in the mysteries, and only
allowed to others once a year.’?
Broth of abominations] i.¢.,
broth made of the unclean animals
offered to heathen deities. ‘ Abomi-
nations’ (skzggi¢im) occurs only in
this and the next chapter (Ixvi. 3,
comp. v.17) in Isaiah; it is spe-
cially characteristic of Jeremiah and
the writers who followed him. We
find it, however, once in Hosea (ix.

1 Hierozoicon, i. 696.

10), once in the disputed Book of
Deuteronomy (xxix. 17, Hebr. 16),
and often in the disputed Book of
Leviticus. For the construction of
the phrase of which these words
form part, comp. v. I2 a.

5 ‘Who say, Keep by thyself)
An allusion to some heathen myste-
ries, into which the Jewish renegades
had been initiated (comp. Ixvi. 17).
Idclatry was bad enough itself,
but that idolaters should assume
a superiority over Jehovah’s ‘holy
ones’ (comp. Ixvi. 5) was still
worse.-——-I am holy unto thee]
i.e., by implication, unapproachable,
tabooed, sacrosanctus (comp. on iv.
3). So of the priests it is said,
‘Thou shalt sanctify him therefore,
for the food of thy God doth he
present: he shall be holy unto
thee’ (Lev. xxi. 8, quoted by Bau-
dissin). Geiger’s reading is plau-
sible (comp. Ezek. xliv. 19 end,
Hag. 11. 12, 13).8 But a warning
not to run the risk of becoming
‘sanctified’ (and therefore disquali-
fied: for ordinary work) by contact,
does not sufficiently bring out the
pride of these pagan ‘Pharisees.’
—— These ae) ie., these supply
the material of. A smoke in my
nose] The indignation of the
speaker makes his breath issue
forth like smoke, Comp. asus pro-
Jiat tras.

° itis written before me] The
subject may be either the sin of
the Jews (Calv., Hitz., Knob., Del.),
which is ‘written,’ as Jeremiah says
(xvii. 1), ‘ with a pen of iron,’ or the
Divine decree for its punishment
(Vitr., Ges., Stier, Naeg., Kay).
The fortunes of men, past, present,

2 Sir Gardner Wilkinson, note on Herod, ii. 47 (Rawlinson),
3 See Geiger, Urschrift und Uebersetsungen der Bibel, pp. 56, 172, 493

CHAP. LXY.] ISAIAH, 117

silence, except I have requited, and requited into their bosom.
7 Your iniquities, and the iniquities of your fathers together,
saith Jehovah, who burned incense upon the mountains, and
reproached me upon the hills! And I will measure their re-
compence first into their bosom.

8 Thus saith Jehovah, As when grapes are found in the
cluster, and one saith, ‘ Destroy it not, for a blessing is in it,’
so will I do for my servants’ sake, that I destroy not the
whole: °and I will bring out from Jacob a seed, and from
Judah possessors of my mountains, and my chosen ones shall
take it in possession, and my servants shall dwell there.
10 And Sharon shall become a pasture for flocks, and the
valley of Achor a place for oxen to lie down in, for my peo-

ple who have enquired of me.

4 And as for you that forsake Jehovah, that forget my

and future, are all noted in the
heavenly books or registers (iv. 3,
Ps. lvi. 8, Dan. vii. 10), but in this
passage it is rather the past than
the future which is recorded, as
appears from the emphatic ‘ before
ine” Comp. Mal. ili. 16, ‘ Jehovah
hearkened and heard it, and a
book of remembrance was written
before him,

7 Your iniquities ... ] Some
take this as the accusative to the
verb at the end of the last verse.
But the change of pronoun is harsh
in the extreme, and it is more natu-
ral to suppose that v. 7 a@ has been
left imperfect (the verb ‘I will re-
quite’ being omitted), owing to the
excitement of the speaker—that it
is, in fact,an exclamation. ——Upon
the mountains] Again a Palesti-
nian feature ; comp. lvii. 7, Hos.
iv. 13._—-And I willmeasure .. .]
The most pressing act which Jeho-
vah as Judge has to perform is to
punish these evil-doers, both fathers
and sons. See the parallel, Jer.
xvi. 18 (which passage is the origi-
nal ?).

8 Transition from threatening to
promise marked by a figure from
the vintage. Jehovah will not re-
ject all Israel because of its many
bad members. His dealings will
be like those of vintagers, who, if

they find even a few good grapes
on a Cluster, say to each other, De-
stroy it not,for a blessing is in it}
(‘A blessing’ =a source of blessing,
as xix. 24, Gen. xii. 2). Probably,
as the swing of the rhythm has led
several to infer, these are the open-
ing words of a vintage-song, though
it is unwise to speculate as to their
connexion with the words ‘ Destroy
not’ (AZ fashkhéth} at the head of
certain psalms.

® My mountains] This is one
of Isaiah’s striking phrases, though
not confined to him (see on xiv. 24),
Sharon ... Achor] i.e., the
whole land from east to west ; see
on xxxiil. 9, and Josh. vii. 24-26,
The same prominence is given to
agriculture in an earlier ideal pic-
ture of the future (xxx. 23, 24).

1 The tone of threatening is
resumed (as so often).——That
forget my holy mountain] This
need not, as most commentators
suppose, imply that the persons
addressed are the Jewish exiles in
Babylon. It may simply mean,
‘that keep aloof from the rites and
ceremonies of the temple.’ A si-
milar phrase, ‘to forget Jerusalem,
occurs in Ps. cxxxvii., which all
will probably admit to be a post-.
Exile work._—That set in order
a table] Alluding to the ‘ lectister-

118

ISATAH.

(CHAP. Lxv.

holy mountain, that set in order a table for Gad, and fill up
mixed drink for M’ni—'I destine you for the sword, and
ye all to the slaughter shall bow down, because I called and

nia,’ or meals prepared for divine
beings. This feature will suit Ba-
bylonia as well as (probably) Pales-
tine. See the second calendar
translated by Sayce in Records of
the Past, vii. 159-168 (every day of
the month Ebul is marked by a
royal offering) ; and comp. Herod.
i. 181, Bel and Drag. wv. 11, Ep. of
Jer. vv. 26, 27. The only other
allusions to ‘lectisternia’ in the
canonical books are Jer. vii. 18, li.
44. Itis a remarkable fact that a
similar practice 27 honour of Gad
survived in certain Jewish families
even down to the time of Rashi
(11th cent.).\—— For Gad] i.e., for
Good Fortune; Sept., 76 dapovia
Gad is probably the star-god Jupi-
ter(called by the Arabs‘ the greater
fortune’). His cultus exemplifies the
closeness with which polytheistic
rites cling to their native soil. Its
origin (see, however, below) was
Canaanitish ; comp. Baal-gad (i.e.,
Baal in the character of the god
of good fortune), the name of a
place to the south of Hermon,
mentioned in Josh. xi. 17, xil. 7.
Some have also traced the name
of Gad in the proper name Azgad
(which occurs four times in Ezra
and Nehemiah), but this is rather
the Aramaic zzgad ‘a messenger.’
In Phoenician inscriptions we find
the names Gad-astoreth and Gad-
moloch (de Vogiié), The preva-
lence of the worship of the deity
called Gad in Syria has been abun-
dantly shown by Mordtmann,? who
quotes zxzfer alia a remarkable pas-
sage from the Christian writer,
Jacob of Serug: ‘Henceforth, on
the summit of the mountains, they

build monasteries, instead of Beith-
gadé (gadé, the plural of gad in
Syriac, means generally both ‘the
good fortunes’, viz. Jupiter and
Venus, though in the Peshito ver-
sion of our passage it is the equiva-
lent of Gad and M’ni conjointly).
It is possible, however, that Gad

as a Babylonian origin. ‘Jupi-
ter, according to Mr. Sayce,$ * was
properly termed Lubat-Guttav; pos-
sibly this Gad (in Isa. xv. 11) is
derived from Guttav, with a change
of the dental to assimilate the word
to the Semitic gad, luck.’ Of course,
the existence of a Babylonian ana-
logue would not prove that the
worshippers spoken of lived in
Babylonia. The analogy might go
back (as in other cases) to a remote
antiquity.|——For Mnf] ie. for
Destiny ; Sept. 77 rvxyy M’ni is
probably Venus, called in Arabic
‘the lesser fortune.’ M)’nf, like
Gad, was a Syrian deity, though the
evidence for this only belongs to
the post-Exile period. De Luynes
and Levy have found the name
in compound proper names on
Aramean coins of the Achemeni-
dze ; the latter has also found it on
a Sinaitic inscription. Delitzsch
remarks that there is no Babylo-
nian analogue for M’ni. Finzi and
Lenormant, however, have both
found a Babylonian god of the
second order called ‘great Manu.’
M’nf may very possibly be a Semi-
tised form of Manu.—M’nf appears
to be a masculine form ; we know
that among the Babylonians at
least there was a masculine as well
as afeminine Venus (see on xiv. 12).
It seems probable that the Arabic

1 See the Talmudic and Rabbinic authorities in Chwolson, Dre Ssadver, ii. 226.
The Arabic writer en-Nadim also mentions lectisternia in honour of ‘the lord of for-
tune’ (i.e., Jupiter) ; these were given by the heathen population of Harran (Chwolson,

op. ett. 32).

2 Zeitschr. d. deutsch, morg. Ges., XXXi. 99-101.
% Transactions of Soc. of Bibl. Archeology, iit. 170-1.
4 Levy, Zettschr. d. deutsch, morg. Ges., xiv. 410; Rodiger, in Addenda to Gese-

nius’ Thesaurus, p. 97

’ They refer to the Bit. Mus. collection of cuneiform inscriptions, iii. 66.

CHAP. LXV.] ISAIAH. 119

ye did not answer, I spoke, and ye did not hearken, but did
that which was evil in mine eyes, and that in which I had no
pleasure ye chose. 1 Therefore thus saith the Lord, Jehovah :
Behold, my servants shall eat, but ye shall hunger ; behold
my servants shall drink, but ye shall thirst ; behold, my ser-
vants shall rejoice, but ye shall be ashamed ; ' behold, my
servants shall sing aloud for gladness of heart, but ye shall
cry out for anguish of heart, and for breaking of spirit shall
ye howl. And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto
my chosen ones—*‘ Then may the Lord Jehovah slay thee*’,
but his servants shall he call by another name, so that he
who blesseth himself on earth shall bless himself by the God
of the Amen‘; and he who sweareth on earth shall swear
by the God of ‘the Amen’; because the former distresses
are forgotten, and because they are hidden from mine eyes.

¢ So Ew.—Most, And the Lord Jehovah shall slay thee.
f Faithfulness, Weir (see below).

Manft represents a collateral femi-
nine form of the name.!_ If so, we
have an interesting link between
Syrian and pre-Mohammedan Ara-
bian religion, Manat being the
name of one of the three chief
deities of Arabia, who were re-
cognised for a time by Mohammed
as mediators with Allah (Kordn,
Sur. lili. 19-23).

1 For a curse] i.e., as the cen-
tre of a formula of imprecation.
Comp. Num. v. 21, Zech. viii. 13,
Ps. cii. 8 (Q. P. B.), and especially
Jer. xxix. 22, ‘And from thee shall
be taken a curse . . . saying, Je-
hovah make thee like Zedekiah and
like Ahab, whom the king of Baby-
lon wasted in the fire.” The for-
mula is quoted imperfectly, like the
first words of a song. Alt. rend.
seems to me to interrupt the flow
of the sentence, and involves a
harsh change of number. Del.,
who, on supposed grammatical
grounds (see crit. note), adopts it,
yet assumes that ‘the prophet has
in his mind the words of this im-
precatory formula (hence the singu-
lar“... kill chee”), though he does
not express them.’——By another

name] It is implied that the name
‘Israel’ has become debased by
the lapse of so many of the Israel-
ites. Comp. the ‘new name’ in
Ixxii. 26.

18 Shall bless himself by] 1.e.,
shall wish himself the blessings
which proceed from. So Gen. xxii.
18, xxvi. 4, Jer. iv. 2, Ps. Ixxii. 17.
The God of the Amen] Comp.
Rev. iii. 14, ‘The Amen, the faith-
ful and truthful witness.’ The ex-
pression is generally derived from
the custom of saying Amen (i.e.,
‘It is sure’) in a solemn covenant
(comp. Deut. xxvii. 15 &c.): Targ.
renders ‘the God of the oath’—at
any rate a plausible paraphrase. I
confess, however, that I can hardly
believe that our prophet would have
coined such a phrase, which seems
to me to belong to a more liturgical
age, when ‘Amen’ had become a
common formula in the temple-
services. One is tempted to alter
the vowel points, and read ’dmen
or ’émn ‘faithfulness’ (xxv. 1) in-
stead of ’amén; comp. Sept., rov
Gedy rov ddnOivor. [A similar sugges-
tion by Dr. Weir.] —-Hidden from
mine eyes] One chapter of the

1 Comp. Sprenger, Leven Mohammads, ii. 16,

120

ISAIAH.

(CHAP. Lxv.

'7 For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth ; and
the former things shall not be remembered, nor come up into

the mind.

'8 Rejoice ye rather, and exult for ever on account

of that which I create; for behold, I create Jerusalem (anew)
as exultation and her people as joy; and I will exult in
Jerusalem, and rejoice in my people, and no more shall there
be heard in her the sound of weeping, nor the sound of a cry.

22 And no more shall there

heavenly book (see on v. 6) is can-
celled; its contents are as though
they had never been. The con-
tinuity of Israel’s development is

restored.
M-25 The new creation (as
Ixvi. 22). Justin Martyr (Déad. c.

Tryph. c. 81) quotes these verses
as a prediction of the millennium.
In fact, our prophet combines the
conceptions of the millennium and
the cosmos, which in the Apo-
calypse are held asunder. As a
consequence, the descriptions in
our prophecy may be interpreted
more materialistically than those
in Rev, xxi.

17 ¥ create new heavens and a
new earth ... | This is no mere
poetical figure for the return of
prosperity (as, e.g., Albert Barnes
would have it). The prophet does
his utmost to exclude this view by
his twofold emphatic statement.—
“new heavens shall be creased, and
the old shall pass away. The
fundamental idea is that nature
itself must be transformed to be in
harmony with regenerate Israel;
we have met with it in more than
the germ already (see xi. 6-9 with
note xxx. 26, xliil. 19, li. 16). The
supposition of Dr. Kohut,! that we
have here a loan from Zoroastrian-
ism is altogether gratuitous, 1. be-
cause such a conception arises
naturally out of the fundamental
Biblical idea of the perpetual crea-
torship of God (comp. John v. 17),
and 2. because the regeneration
of nature expected by the prophet
differs from that taught in the
Bundehesh in several essential

proceed thence an infant of

particulars—e.g., he looks forward
to the continuance of births and
deaths (vv. 20, 22) and of the ordi-
nary process of nourishment (v. 21),
and he makes no mention of the
resurrection of the dead (comp. on
XXxVi. 19)."—-The former things]
Some understand by this phrase
‘the former troubles’ (comp. liv. 4) ;
others ‘the former heaven and
earth’ (comp. Jer. iii, 16). But
why may we not, as Naeg. suggests,
combine both references ?

18 On account of . . . | Lit., in
respect of . . . (comp. xxxi. 6 Hebr.).
XI create Jerusalem] The ‘new
creation’ will still have its Jerusa-
lem ! It is not a creation de nihilo,
but a transformation.— As ex.
ultation] i.e., with an abounding
sense of joy as the basis of the
new nature (like ‘ I am prayer,’ Ps.
cix. 4).

20 The youth shall die... |
i.e. he who dies at the age of a
hundred shall be regarded as early
lost, and even the wicked, suppos-
ing such to exist, shall not be cut
off by the curse which pursues
them before their hundredth year.
Our prophet has not so glorious a
view of the future as that which is
embodied in xxv. 8. It is not eter-
nal life which he here anticipates,
but patriarchal longevity (as Zech.
viii. 4). Comp. the picture in the
apocryphal Book of Enoch (v. 9),
‘And they shall not be punished all
their life long, neither shall they
die by plagues and judgments ; but
the number of their days shall they
complete, and they shall grow old
in peace, and the years of their

Y Zetichr, d. deutsch, morg, Ges., XXX. 716, 717.
9 Matthes, Cheologtsch Tijdschrift, 1877, p. 585.

121

CHAP. LXV.] ISAIAH,

(a few) days, nor an old man who cannot fill up his days ; for
the youth shall die when a hundred years old, and the sinner,
when a hundred years old, shall come under the curse. 7! And
they shall build houses, and inhabit them, and shall plant
vineyards, and eat their fruit: ” they shall not build, and
another inhabit ; they shall not plant, and another eat ; for as
the days of £a tree % shall be the days of my people, and the
work of their hands mine elect shall use to the full. 7’ They
shall not labour for vanity, nor bring forth for sudden trouble,
for they are a seed of the blessed of Jehovah, and their off-
spring (shall remain) with them. * And it shall come to pass
that before they call, I will answer: while they are yet speak-
ing, I will hear. % The wolf and the lamb shall graze to-
gether, and the lion shall eat straw like the ox ; and the ser-
pent—dust shall be his food : they shall not harm nor destroy

in all my holy mountain, hath Jehovah said.

& The tree of Life, Sept., Targ.

happiness shall be many, in ever-
lasting bliss and peace, their whole
life long.’ (This reminds us of the
Paradise of the Avesta, in which a
year was equal to a day, Vendidad,
li. 133.)

21 And they shall build houses
».. | Alluding perhaps to the
curse in Deut. xxviii. 30, the exact
opposite of which forms the basis
of the promise. Comp. also Ixii.
8, 9, Am. ix. 14.

22 As the days of atree] In-
stances enough of long-lived trees
can be found in Palestine, without
referring to the boabab-tree of
Senegal ! Comp. in lxi. 3 ‘oaks
of righteousness,’ and Ps. xcii. 14,
‘ They shall still shoot forth in old
age.’ Shall use to the full] Lit.,
wear out. Comp. Job xxi. 13, ‘They
wear out their days (i.e., live out
their full term) in prosperity.’

*8 wor bring forth... i.e.,
their children shall not perish by
any of God’s ‘ four sore judgments.’
Comp. Ps. Ixxviii. 33, ‘and (he
consumed) their years by a sudden
trouble.,——-(Shall remain) with
them] It is a part of the ‘blessing’

1 Legend of Ishtar, line 8 (back side) :—all the translations agree.

(Gloss.)

that their children grow up and
enjoy life with them. Comp. Job
xxi. 8.

25 The picture of the new crea-
tion is completed by a reference
to the animal world. It would be
inconsistent to leave the lower
animals with untransformed na-
tures. But it is only a single fea-
ture which is given, and that in
the form, mainly, of a condensed
quotation from xi. 6-9. One origi-
nal clause, however, is added, And
the serpent—dust shall be his
food] i.e., the serpent shall content
himself with the food assigned him
in the primeval Divine decree (there
is a manifest allusion to Gen. iii. 14).
This, if I am not mistaken, is meant
literally ; ‘much dust’ is the food
of the shades in the Assyrio-
Babylonian Hades.!—-They shall
not harm... . ] The subject is, of
course, the wild animals mentioned
in the original passage, xi. 6, 7.
Hence a_ strong presumption
(whatever be the date of chap. lxv.)
in favour of interpreting xi. 9 (see
note) literally, and not allegori-
cally.

Comp. Ps.

xxii, 15, ‘and thou layest mein the dust of Death’ (i.e., of Shedl).

122 ISAIAH, [CHAP. LXVI.

CHAPTER LXVI.

Contents A declaration by Jehovah that he requires no earthly
habitation, and is displeased with the service of unspiritual worshippers ;
this is followed by a solemn antithesis between the fate of the perse-
cutors and the persecuted (vv. 1-5). Next, a renewal of the alternate
threats and promises of chap. lxv. (vv. 6-24). The former are mainly
addressed to the hostile Gentiles, but partly also to the idolatrous Jews,
and the idolatrous practices denounced (v. 17) are the same as those
mentioned in Ixv. 4, 5, viz., initiation into heathen mysteries, and eating
‘unclean’ food. The prophecy closes gloomily with an awful glance at
the punishment of the guilty souls (v. 24).

In deference to custom, I have treated these two parts as rightly
united in a single chapter, though not entirely convinced that this view
is correct. The most obvious interpretation of vv. 1-3 is that, at the
real or assumed standing-point of the writer, the temple was no longer
standing, and that the Divine speaker reprobates any attempt to rebuild
it and to restore the sacrificial system. On the other hand, v. 6, and
perhaps also vv. 20, 21, seem at least as clearly to imply that the temple
is in existence. I have endeavoured to remove this apparent inconsis-
tency in my note on v. 1 4; still I cannot think it @ fvzor¢ probable that
passages apparently so inconsistent should have been intended to form
part of one and the same chapter.

1 Thus saith Jehovah, The heavens are my throne, and the
earth is my footstool ; what manner of house would ye build

houses made with hands.’ It may,
in fact, be another example ot

1 The heavens are my throne
...] For parallels, see Ps. xi. 4,

cili. 19 ; comp. also the words of
Jesus in Matt. v. 34, xxiii. 22.
‘What manner of house .

Many consider this to be a repro-
bation of a plan for rebuilding the
temple, whether, with Hitzig, we
suppose this to have proceeded
from the Jews who remained be-
hind in Chaldza (the reprobation
applying, according to him, to a
Chaldzan and not to aJudzan tem-
ple), or whether, with Lowth and
Vitringa, we assume a reference
to the temple of Herod the Great.
The words need not, however, be
more than an emphatic declara-
tion that Jehovah ‘ dwelleth not in

1 Canon Cook's translation, A. P., iv. 109.

by M. Maspero (1868).

‘the Gospel before the Gospel’ (see
Acts vii. 48, xvii. 24), for a similar
statement of equal distinctness will
be looked for in vain in the Old
Testament. The ‘Light which
lighteth every man’ in this in-
stance shone earlier on the banks
of the Nile. An Egyptian hymn
to the Nile, dating from the 19th
dynasty (14th cent. B.C.), contains
these words, ‘His abode is not
known: no shrine is found with
painted figures: there is no build-
ing that can contain him.’? It is
also a Persian sentiment ; comp.
Herod. i. 131, ‘They have no
images of the gods, no temples,’ &c.

The hymn has also been translated

CHAP. LXVI.]

for me ? and what manner of place for my rest?

ISAIAH.

134

*¥For all

these things did my hand make; [*I spoke*,] and all these
came into being (the oracle of Jehovah) ; but this is the man
upon whom I look, even he who is afflicted, and crushed in

spirit, and trembleth on account of my word.

3 He that

® So Gratz, Monatschrift, 1878, p. 293.

? All these things] viz., heaven
and earth, and all things therein ;
comp. xl. 26, Job xii. 9. I spoke]
These words seem necessary to
complete the clause; comp. Ps.
xxxill. 6, ‘By a word of Jehovah
were the heavens made,’ and v. 9,
‘He spake and it came into being’
(also Gen. i. 3).——This is the
man upon whom. .] Comp.
Iii, 15. Trembleth on ac-
count of my word] Not in alarm,
but in a filial awe, which does not
exclude the transports of delight
(comp. Ps. cxix. 161 with v. 111).
The ‘word’ is that delivered in the
name of Jehovah by the prophets.
The phrase is only found again in
Ezra (ix. 4, x. 3).

3 He that slaughtereth ... ]
i.e, he that would slaughter...
The sacrifice(contemptuously called
the slaughter) of an ox, when
offered by unspiritual worshippers,
is as displeasing to God as the sin
of murder (comp. i. 11-15). So at
least we must interpret, if this
paragraph comes from the same
writer as the next; and in any
case, such must have been the
exegesis of the editor of the chap-
ter in its present form.—It is
tempting to compare Ixv. 3-5, but
though the several parts of the
prophetic book beginning at chap.
xl. have many points of connection,
we must be on our guard against
illusory affinities. The persons
eae of here are evidently wor-
shippers of Jehovah, and are there-
fore distinct from those in Ixv. 3-5.
Breaketh a dog’s neck] Why
this feature? It seems farfetched
to suppose a covert polemical re-
ference to the religious reverence
for the dog in Persia and Egypt
(comp. Bochart, AHzerozoicon, i.
691-2), and better to explain the

expression from the uncleanness
and despicableness of this animal
among the Jews. Taking this pas-
sage, however, in connection with
v. 17, and with Ixv. 4, one feels
that some very peculiar sin of the
contemporaries of the prophet is
referred to, and the researches of
a Scottish scholar have thrown an
unexpected light uponit. In short,
it is totem-worship (see above, on
xv. 6) against which the prophet
lifts up his voice; the unclean
animals referred to were, most pro-
bably, the totems, oranimal-fetishes,
of certain Jewish families. The
survival of this low form of religion
(if the word may be used in this
connection), is presupposed even
more certainly by a passage in
Ezekiel (viii. 10, 11), hitherto wrapt
in obscurity, ‘where we find seventy
of the elders of Israel—that is, the
heads of houses—worshipping in.a
chamber which had on its walls
the figures of all manner of unclean
creeping things and quadrupeds,
“even all the idols of the house of
Israel,” and in the midst of the
worshippers Jaazaniah, the son of
Shaphan, i.e., the son of the rock-
badger (the ‘coney’ of Auth.
Vers.), which is one of the unclean
quadrupeds, according to Deut. xiv.
7, Lev. xi. 5. In fact, the proper
names of the Israelites give evi-
dence which is, I think, conclusive
toa philological eye, in favour of
the survival of this archaic worship.
In Isa. Ixv., Ixvi., the swine, the
dog, and the mouse are specially
mentioned in connection with an
illegal cultus, and all of them are
found inthe Old Testamentas names
of persons—the swine (Auth. Vers.,
Hezer, rather £#ézir) in 1 Chron.
xxiv. 15, Neh. x. 213; the dog
(Caleb = £alzb = Arab kalé or Hebr.

ISAIAI. (CHAP. LXVIL.

124
slaughtereth an ox is a man-slayer; he that sacrificeth a
sheep, breaketh a dog’s neck ; he that bringeth a meal-offering
—(it is) swine’s blood ; he that maketh a memorial of incense,
blesseth an idol. As ¢#ey have chosen their own ways, and
their soul hath pleasure in their abominations, ‘so will 7
choose freaks of fortune for them, and their terrors will I
bring unto them, because I called, and there was none that
answered, I spoke, and they did not hearken, but did that
which was evil in mine eyes, and that in which I had no
pleasure they chose. *Hear the word of Jehovah, ye that
tremble at his word: Your brethren that hate you, that put
you away for my name’s sake, say, ‘Let Jehovah show him-
self glorious, that we may look upon your joy,’ but they

themselves shall be ashamed.

keleb) in Num. xiii. 6, &c.—hence
the dog-tribe (Hebr. £a/tbd7) to
which Nabal belonged, 1 Sam. xxv.
3; the mouse (Achbor) in Gen.
xxxvi. 38, 2 Kings xxii, 12, 14,
Jer. xxvi. 22, xxxvi. 12. (A panther-
totem is presupposed in Isa. xv. 6;
see above.) Of course the prophet
regarded this worship as a super-
stition dishonouring to the one true
God. The tenacity with which a
section (probably a large section)
of the Israelites clung to it throws
a bright light on the repeated asser-
tions of the prophets that their
people was not chosen by Jeho-
vah for any merits of its own.
On this whole subject, see ‘ Ani-
mal Worship and Animal Tribes
among the Arabs and in the Old
Testament,’ by Prof. Robertson
Smith, in Journal of Philology,
where abundant parallels to the
totemism of the Israelites are ad-
duced from Arabia. Swine's
blood] See on lxv. 4.——That
maketh a memorial... . ] ‘ Me-
morial’ is a technical term in the
sacrificial ritual for the burning of
a part of the mukhahk or meal-
offering with incense upon the altar
(see Lev. ii. 2, Q. B. P.). Bles-
seth] i.e., worshippeth.

4 So will /choose... i ‘The
Orientals are fond of such anti-
theses,’ remarks Gesenius. It is,

however, more than a verbal anti-
thesis which we have here; it is
Jehovah’s fundamental law of re-
tribution (see on v. 8). So inthe
Kordn (as Gesenius points out),
‘, , they say, We are with you,
we have only mocked at them:
God shall mock at them’ (Sur. ii.
13, 14); ‘The hypocrites would
deceive God, but he will deceive
them?’ (Sur. iv. 141). Freaks of
fortune] The word is very pecu-
liar: it represents calamity under
the figure of a petulant child (comp.
iii. 4 Hebr.).

5 The prophet turns abruptly to
those who in holy reverence wait
upon Jehovah. They have suffered
for Jehovah, and He will work
mightily for them.—That put
you away] i.e, that refuse to
associate with you (comp. Ixv. 5).
In later Hebr. the word (wzddah) is
used of ‘ putting out of the syna-
gogue’ (comp. the use of adopitw in
Luke vi. 22) ; w¢ddity is the lightest
of the three grades of excommuni-
cation. Let Jehovah show
himself glorious... ] An ironical
speech, reminding us of v. 19. Dr.
Kay renders the verb ‘.. . be
glorious’; but ‘ become glorious’
seems better, or the equivalent
given above. (Kal is used, as in
Mal. i. 5, though we should expect
Nifal.)

CHAP. LXVI.] ISAIAH. 125

6 A sound of uproar from the city, a sound from the tem-
ple; the sound of Jehovah who rendereth their deserts to his
enemies! 7‘ Before she travailed, she brought forth; before
pangs came unto her, she was delivered of a man-child. * Who
hath heard such a thing? Who hath seen things like these ?
Can a country be travailed with in a day, or a nation be

brought forth at once? for Zion hath travailed, and also

brought forth her sons.’

Should I bring to the birth, and

not cause to bring forth, saith Jehovah? or should I, who
cause to bring forth, restrain it ? saith thy God.

6-4 Alternate threats and pro-
mises ; the glorious return of the
believing Jews contrasting with the
terrible and endless punishment of
their enemies.

6 a sound of uproar... ]
The form of the verse reminds
us of xiii. 4. There, however, the
‘uproar is caused by the assem-
bling of Jehovah’s human agents ;
here it is that symbolic thunder
which marks a theophany. There
the primary object is the destruc-
tion of Babylon ; here the sole end
is the last act of the drama of the
judgment, in which all Jehovah’s
enemies bear a passive part. The
catastrophe is to take place before
Jerusalem (as in Joel and Zecha-
riah); hence it is added, From the
city ... from the temple] No
doubt the latter words come in
rather strangely after the seeming
disparagement of temples in v. I.
But the inconsistency is probably
merely superficial (see above).
The precise meaning, however, of
the words ‘from the temple’ will
depend on our view of the origin
of this prophecy. If written from
the point of view of the Babylonian
Exile, we must suppose Jehovah to
have (in a sense) taken up his
abode again on the site of the de-
stroyed and for a long time God-
forsaken temple. If from the
point of view of the restored exiles,
then we may suppose that the
temple has been rebuilt, and that
Jehovah (in a sense) issues from it
to take vengeance on his own and
Israel’s enemies. However this

may be, vv. 7, 8 are written from a
new point of view. They represent
the other side of the doctrine of the
judgment (comp.a similar transition
in Ixv. 8). Israel has been restored
and an imaginary spectator bursts
out into a wondering exclamation.
The subject of uv. 6 is resumed in
U. 15.

7 Before she travailed . . “]
The same figure has been use
before (see xlix. 17-21, liv. 1), but
with less drastic energy. A childis
born, a man-child, but swiftly and
without pain. The ‘child’ is the
Israel of the latter days, the con-
cluding stages of Israel’s history
being fused in the dim prophetic
light. Grotius (who had _ philolo-
gical instincts) explained of the
achievements of Judas Maccabeus.
He rightly felt that the age of Ze-
rubbabel presented no fulfilment of
the prophet’s burning words.—The
mention of a ‘man-child’ is signifi-
cant. ‘Sweeter than the birth of a
boy,’ says an Arabic proverb quoted
by Gesenius. Till Mohammed in-
terfered, the Arabs had a cruel
custom of burying female infants
alive.

® Should I bring to the birth
... ] ‘Should I arrange all the pre-
liminary circumstances for the re-
storation of my people, and stop
there?’ ‘Restrain it’ implies that
the expansiveness of Zion is such
that naught but Omnipotence will
be able to check it, and as Omni-
potence has no motive for checking
it, Zion has nothing to fear either
in heaven or on earth,

126 ISAIAH, [CHAP. LXVL

© Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and dance for joy because of
her, all ye who love her; exult together with her, all ye who
mourned inwardly over her ; '' that ye may suck, and be satis-
fied, from the breast of her consolations ; that ye may press
out, and delight yourselves, from the ® bosom of her glory.
1 For thus saith Jehovah, Behold, I will direct peace unto her
like a river, and the glory of the nations like an overflowing
torrent, and ye shall suck therefrom ; upon the side shall ye
be borne, and upon the knees shall ye be caressed. '3As a
man whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you ; yea,
in Jerusalem shall ye be comforted. ' And ye shall behold,
and your heart shall exult, and your bones shall spring up
like young grass, and the hand of Jehovah shall make him-
self known towards his servants, but he shall deal indigna-

tion to his enemies.

18 For behold, Jehovah shall come in fire, and his chariots
are like the whirlwind, to return his anger in fury, and his

rebuke in flames of fire.

6 For by fire will Jehovah hold

judgment, and by his sword with all flesh, and many shall be

the slain of Jehovah.

10,11 The prospect is so near that
the friends of Jerusalem should at
once give expression to their joy,
if they wish to be rewarded by a
share in her bliss. ——~Mfourned in-
wardly] For the rend., see 1 Sam.
xv. 35 Hebr.

1 That yemay suck .. . | The
blessings which Jerusalem has re-
ceived are compared to a mother’s
milk. Comp. a different use of the
figure in v. 12 and Ix. 16.

12 y will direct peace] So Gen.
xxxix. 21 ‘(Jehovah) directed kind-
ness unto him.’ Upon the side]
See on lx. 4. Obs., those who ‘ bear’
and ‘caress’ are the Gentiles.

1 Asa man...] Asa mother
comforts, not merely her child, but
her grown-up son.

14 your bones shall spring up
. . . ] The body is likened to a tree
of which the bones are the branches
(Job xviii. 13 Hebr.). During the
anger of Jehovah, the latter had
been dried up and sapless (comp.

Those that consecrate and purify

b So (lit. udder) Luz. ; most moderns, abundance.

See crit. note.

Ps, xxxii. 4). The hand of
Jehovah] No mere figure of speech
(Ges. renders, ‘ Jehovah’s might’),
but God under His self-revealing
aspect (see on viii. II).

18 The theophany. There is no
occasion, with Dr. Kohut, to con-
nect this with the Zoroastrian doc-
trine of the end of the world by
fire, even if this doctrine be really
ancient, and not rather due to Se-
mitic influences. ‘Hecometh with
fire’ is the natural description of
a theophany in Biblical language ;
comp. xxix. 6 (note), xxx. 27, 28.
——His chariots] In Ps. xviii. 10
Jehovah rides upon ‘a cherub’;
here, as in Hab. iii. 8, the single
chariot is multiplied, to symbolise
the ‘hosts’ of natural and super-
natural forces at his command.

16 wis sword] See on xxxiv. 5,6.
All flesh] See on v. 18.

17 A fresh denunciation of the
sins mentioned in lIxv. 3, 4 (see
notes). Those Jews who are guilty

CHAP. LXVI.] ISATAII. 27,

themselves for the gardens [after One in the midst°], that
eat swine’s flesh, and the abominations, and the mouse, to-
© So Hebr. text (‘One’ is masc.).—Behind one (viz., one image of a goddess,

‘one’ being fem.), Hebr. marg., Vulg. (see Del.’s note).—One after the other, Pesh.,
Targ., Symmachus, Theodotion, Sept. omits the words.

of them will share the punishment to the ordinary reading. Early

of the hostile Gentiles——That
consecrate and purify them-
selves] As a preparation for the
heathen mysteries in the gardens
(i. 29, Ixv. 3). After One in the
midst] An obscure, enigmatical
phrase, and possibly corrupt. The
prevalent explanation (a) is (Ges.,
Hitz., Knob., Del., Naeg., Baudis-
sin) that it describes the way in
which the rites of the mysteries
were performed, viz., standing be-
hind, or perhaps rather with close
adherence to (‘after’ = ‘according
to’) the directions of the hiero-
phant or leader (who would natu-
rally stand in the centre of the ring
of celebrants). This is no doubt
plausible, but requires a great deal
to be supplied, unless (fer zmposst-
bile) we suppose that the initial rite
of purification was so complicated
that it needed a special superin-
tendent even more than the mys-
teries themselves. It is surprising
that those critics who, one after
another, have adopted it, have
not felt obliged to go further, and
put a blank space in their transla-
tion between the words ‘garden’
and ‘after,’ to indicate that some
words have fallen out. This is at
any rate a possible solution. (6) An-
other view of the meaning is em-
bodied in alt. read., but is adaptable

Jewish critics felt that some refer-
ence was required to the deity in
whose honour the mysteries were
celebrated, and appear to have
thought of the Syrian goddess
Asherah, whose licentious rites were
doubtless performed in groves.
Hence their conjectural emendation
(for such alt. read. most certainly
is), ’akhath for ’ekhadh (the feminine
for the masculine). Their general
view seems confirmed by the com-
mon use of ‘after’ in technical
religious phrases, eg., ‘to walk
after other gods’ (Jer. vii. 9), ‘to
walk after Jehovah’ (Hos. xi. 10),
‘to lament after Jehovah’ (1 Sam.
vil. 2), ‘to fulfil after (= wholly to
follow) Jehovah’ (Deut. i. 36). But
the mention of swine’s flesh just
afterwards suggests the worship of
Tammuz or Adonis (see below,
Last Words, ad loc.) rather than
of Ashérah, and the reference to
‘the gardens’ suits this equally
well (see on xvii. 10), This view
was the prevalent one among the
post-Reformation scholars,! and
has been advocated with much
force by Prof. de Lagarde (in spite
of a faulty inference from a passage
in Macrobius).? It may now be
confirmed from the cuneiform ac-
count of the Assyrian or Babylo-
nian festival of Istar and Tammuz

: 1 ‘Scaliger, Seldenus, Drusius, Vossius, Grotius, Bochartus, Marshamus, magna
in literis nomina et appellari digna, huic conjecturze faverunt ; estque summé probab-

ilis.’ Vitringa.
_ ? Hieronymi questiones hebraice, &c., ed. Lagarde, p. 121. The words of Macro-
bius referred to are—' (Assyrii) deo quem summum maximumque venerantur Adad

nomen dederunt’ (Saturn, i. 23). Lagarde conjectures that Macrobius found in his
Greek authority A A 4 miswritten for A A A (=Hebr. ‘e&hddh). But no such name of
a deity as 'ekhadh has yet been found. Macrobius evidently uses ‘Assyrians’ synony-
mously with ‘ Syrians,” and wrongly derives the Syrian divine name Hadad (he calls it
Adad) from the Syriac Akadkhad (lit., ‘unus unus,’ but in usage ‘ unusquisque’).
Lagarde's appeal to the Old Test. phrase, ‘mourning for an (or, the) only-begotten
son’ (Am. viii. 10, Jer. vi. 26, Zech. xii. 10) is more plausible (see the writer's obser-
vations in Academy, x. 524 note), but our text reads 'ekhddh ‘one,’ not yadkhidh ‘only-
begotten.’ See further Vitringa’s Comment., ii. 941, note A; E. Meyer, Zeitschr.
d. deutsch. morg. Ges., 1877, p. 734; and Baudissin, Studien cur semit, Religions-
geschichte, i. 315.

128

gether shall they be consumed—the oracle of Jehovah.

ISAIAH.

[CHAP. LXVI.

8 But

“T [will punish] their words and their thoughts ; [behold the
time] is come that I gather all nations and tongues, and they

4 So Maurer, Del.—I know, Pesh., Targ., some MSS. and early editions of Sept.,
Saadya, Auth. Vers., Vitr., Ges.—I have seen, Gritz.

(strictly, Dum-zi or Tam-zi), on
which occasion we are told that
‘the figure of the goddess is carried
in procession, adorned with jewels
and robes of rich material, attend-
ed by her maids of honour, Savz-
khat or Pleasure, and Harzmatu or
Lust ; and they go in procession
to meet the mourners bearing the
body of the dead Tammuz.’! But
why should Adonis be called ‘One’?
Prof. de Legarde would apparently
take ’ekhadh (here rendered ‘One’)
in the sense of yakhidh ‘unique’
(as Job xxiii. 13), for he compares
the remarkable phrase, ‘mourning
for an only-begotten son’ (éhel
yakhidh). But this seems hazard-
ous (see note ?). The only alterna-
tive is to take the word in question
as a contemptuous or evasive ap-
pellation. Maurer comments thus ;
‘Hebr. ’ekhadh, nescio quis, per
contemptum.’ It is rather more
natural to regard it as a piously
evasive phrase, somewhat like that
employed by the Rajah of Burdwan,
in speaking to Weitbrecht the mis-
sionary, ‘O yes, I have no objec-
tion, if you do not mention one
name’ (meaning the name of Jesus).?
(c) And yet, plausible as both the
above views are, especially the lat-
ter, the combination of letters which
the received text presents, impresses
me by a family-likeness to other
passages of indubitable corrupt-
ness. May it not be a mutilated
fragment of a clause parallel to,
though somewhat shorter than,
‘those that consecrate themselves,’
&c.? The conjecture seems to be
confirmed by the evident defective-
ness of a part of the next verse.

1 St. Chad Boscawen, in Academy, xiv. 91 (July 27, 1878).

——The abominations] A tech-
nical expression in Leviticus, used
synonymously with ‘swarming
things.’ Among ‘the uncleanest’ oy
these animals are mentioned (Lev.
xi, 29) the lizard, the snail, and
the mouse, or rather, perhaps, the
jerboa, which is still eaten by the
Arabs.

‘8 In this verse the prophet re-
sumes the subject opened in v. 6,
viz., the overthrow of Jehovah’s
enemies. Comp. the striking pa-
rallels in Joel iii. 2, Zeph. iii. 8,
Zech. xiv. 2, But I (will pun-
ish)] Some word or words have
evidently dropped out of the text ;
an aposiopesis is not at all probable,
as there is no trace of passion or
excitement in the context, and a
parallel to the Virgilian Quos
ego— is not adducible in Hebrew.
Maurers suggestion, adopted
above, is at any rate forcible. ——
(Behold, the time) is come] It is
not absolutely necessary to sup-
pose that the bracketed words have
dropped out of the text (see Ezek.
xxx1x. 8), but the lacuna in the open-
ing words makes it a not unreason-
able conjecture. Otherwise, we must
assume an ellipsis. ——All nations]
This must be understood with a
limitation (see next verse). — And
tongues] This supplement is re-
markable. Though not inconsis-
tent with the authorship of Isaiah,
it agrees still better with a Cap-
tivity date, and reminds us for-
cibly of the frequent references in
Daniel to ‘peoples, nations, and
tongues’ (Dan. iii. 4, 7, 29, iv. 1, v.
19, vi. 25, vii. 14). The same use
of the word ‘tongue’ occurs in

The basis of the

festival is demonstrably a nature-myth, leading up to the union of the new moon (Istar)

and the summer sun (Tam-zi or Tammuz).

* Memoir of the Rev. Fohn Fames Weitbrecht, p. 543.
% Quoted by Del. in his first and second editions but not in his third. He now
agrees with Naeg. that the passage is probably corrupt,

CHAP. LXVI.J

shall come and see my glory.

ISAIAH,

129

19 And I will work a sign upon

them, and will send the escaped of them unto the nations,
to Tarshish, * Put and Lud, fthat draw the bow‘, to Tubal
and Javan, to the distant countries which have not heard the

© So Sept., Knob., Gratz, Stade.

(Del. inclines to this reading ; as to Hitz. and

Ew., see note below.)—Pun, Wetzstein —Pul, Hebr. text.

£ To Meshech, Sept., Stade.

Zech. viii. 23 (of post-Captivity
origin), and in vv. 5, 20, 31 of Gen.
x. (based probably on a Phoenician

document). My glory] as dis-
played in judicial rewards and
punishments.

9 -—work a sign upon them] Viz.,
upon the assembled Gentile hosts.
The precise meaning of ‘work a
sign’ is obscure. It isan emphatic
phrase (sa#—not zathan or ‘asah
oth); a strict rendering would be
‘set a sign, i.e, as a permanent
memorial. Elsewhere we find it
used of wonders which, by a mo-
dern distinction, we call superna-
tural (Ex, x. 2, Ps. Ixxviil. 43, cv.
27), but ‘ sign’ has a wide meaning
in the Old Test., and can be used
of any markedly providential oc-
currence (see 1 Sam. x. 7 with the
context). Hence itmay here mean
the wonderful escape of some of
the Gentile host (Ew., Del.), or the
all but total destruction of Jehovah’s
enemies (‘it is a vague but sug-
gestive expression, and well cal-
culated to prepare the mind of the
reader for the awful description
with which the prophetic volume
closes’)! The latter was my first
view, but the eschatological paral-
lel in Zech. xiv. seems to me now
to suggest some mysterious event,
which the prophet leaves his awe-
struck readers to imagine. ——Un-
to the nations] The nations which
have had no relation to Israel, nor,
consciously at least, to Jehovah,
form a kind of outer world, with
which Jehovah has no controversy.
——Put and Lud] Put is either
the Egyptian Put (nasalised into
Punt), 1Le., according to Brugsch,

Ul CAN
2
i)

VOL. II.

(Lowth approves in his note.)

the Somali country on the east
coast of Africa, opposite to Arabia,
or it comes from the Egyptian
Puti, another name for the people
commonly called Thehennu, i.e.,
the Marmaridze, who lived west of
the Delta. Pul, the reading of the
received text, occurs nozwhere else
as an ethnic name; Put, however,
occurs in combination with Lud in
Ezek. xxvii. 10, xxx. 5 (comp. Jer.
xlvi. 9). Hence Hitz. and Ew.
suppose Pul to be a collateral form
of Put, but the interchange of ¢eth
and /amedh does not seem to be
established. It is better therefore
to adopt the read. of Sept. Wetz-
stein’s correction, however, is on
several accounts plausible. The
letters 7 and 2 (damedh and nun)
might be easily confounded in the
Hebrew writing. Pun and Lud,
Punians (Carthaginians) and Lydi-
ans, might naturally be mentioned
together in ‘the period subsequent
to the conquest of Babylon by
Cyrus, in which this part of Isaiah
places us.’ The Lydians, too, are
actually called Ludi in Assyrian
inscriptions of the reign of Assur-
banipal. The objection, raised in
my first edition, ‘that the Lydians
had already learned by experience
the might of Jehovah,’ is only of
weight if chaps. Ixv., Ixvi. were
written with an eye to the same
circumstances as chap. xl. &c.
Lud (as is shown by the reference
to it in Ezek. xxx., comp. Gen. x.
13) must be a N.-African people,
though one may hesitate to adopt
Ebers’ precarious combination of
Lud and Rut (the name for the
native-born Egyptians in the hiero-

234.
So Brute: Bey, History of Egypt, second ed., ii. 404.
We tzstein, as reported by Delitzsch, Yesaéa, third ed., p. 720.

K

130

ISATATI.

(CHAP. LXvI.

report of me, nor seen my glory, and they shall make known

my glory among the nations.

20 And they shall bring all

your brethren out of all the nations as an offering unto Je-
hovah upon horses and in chariots and in litters, and upon
mules and dromedaries, to my holy mountain, to Jerusalem,
saith Jehovah, as the children of Israel bring [or, used to
bring] the meal-offering in a clean vessel to the house of

glyphic inscriptions)! See further
Last Words.——Tnat draw the
bow] A similar characterisation of
the Ludim in Jer. xlvi. 9. The
reading of Sept. has the air of a
conjectural emendation, and is un-
necessary, but certainly plausible.
Meshech and Tubal are several
times mentioned together ; the
Muskai of the Assyrian inscriptions
lived to the north-east of the Tab-
lai. Tubal] The Tablai of the
inscriptions dwelt to the west of
the northern arm of the Euphrates,
in a part of Armenia Minor.?
They are mentioned in the table of
nations (Gen. x. 2), also in Ezekiel
(three times). Javan] Javan,
like Tubal and Meshech, was

famous for its traffic in slaves
(Ezek. xxvii. 13). It is obviously
the same as ’Idfov-es, and was

successively applied to the coun-
tries where Ionian Greeks dwelt,
as they became known to the
Phoenicians, and even (Zech. ix. 13,
Dan. viii. 21, x. 20) to Greece in
general. Here, however, it cer-
tainly designates some particular
nation, and most probably the
Ionians on the west coast of Asia
Minor, though Mr. Sayce prefers
to identify it with Cyprus, which
he thinks suits the geographical
order better. Cyprus certainly
bears a name in the Assyrian in-
scriptions which is simply Javan
without the ‘digamma.’ Most
cuneiform scholars have read this
name Yatnan, but it is rather Yanan
(one of the Assyrian characters
having the value @ as well as a¢ or
ad), The distant countries] i.e.,

the coast-lands and islands of the
Mediterranean Sea.

°° And they shall bring .. .]
Not only shall the Gentiles ‘stream’
to the holy city themselves (ii. 2,
Ix. 4), but they shall escort the
Israelitish exiles to Jerusalem with
the tender care and reverence be-
longing to holy things and persons
(comp. Zeph. iii. Io with Keil’s
note). Note the emphasis on ‘a//
your brethren,’ &c. As anoffer-
ing] Or, ‘as a present’ (comp.
xxxIx. I). Probably, however, the
Hebr. word (#zkhah) is here used
in its technical sense. Without ab-
solutely denying the acceptableness
of the ordinary meal-offering, the
prophet asserts that the honour
thus shown to the chosen people
will be fully equal to that paid to the
traditional mznkhah. Comp. Rom.
xv. 16, 7 mpoodhopa rar eAvay, where
the genitive is that of apposition.
—Upon horses .. . mules and
dromedaries] The variety in the
mode of transport corresponds
to the wide extent of the Jewish
dispersion. A similar catalogue is
given in Zech. xiv. 15, to indicate
the multitude of hostile nations as-
sembled round Jerusalem. Lit-
ters] The word only occurs else-
where in Num. vii. 3 (in Lev. xi.
29 it is the name of an animal).
Bring] Whether we render
in the present or the imperfect
tense (to keep the familiar terms)
depends on our view of the date of
the prophecy. If we think that it
was written during the Babylonian
Exile, we shall adopt the latter
tense ; if otherwise, the former.

1 Aegypten und die Biicher Mosis, i. 96-98; comp. Schrader, A. 1. T., ed. 2,

p. 114.
2 Schnader, ALG. £7, p. 156,

CHAP. LXVI.]

ISAIAII.

131

Jehovah ; #'and some of them also will I take unto the priests

£and unto the Levites 8, saith Jehovah.

22 For like as the new

heavens and the new earth, which I make, stand perpetually
before me (the oracle of Jehovah), so shall your seed and

your name stand.

23 And it shall come to pass: from new

moon to new moon, and from sabbath to sabbath, all flesh

& So many Hebr. MSS. (including almost all the oldest), and all the versions (see
Curtiss, The Levitical Priests, pp. 205-213, and comp. Del.'s note, Yesaza, 3rd ed.,
p. 684).— Unto the Levites, Received Hebr, text.

“1 and some of them also... |
The language used leaves it quite
uncertain whether the Gentiles are
referred to (so Vitr., Ges., Ew.,
Alexander, Del., Kay, Naeg.), or
the Jews of the dispersion (so
Ibn Ezra, Kimchi, Hitz., Herzfeld,
Knob., Henderson, Seinecke, H.
Schultz). The advocates of the
Jatter view refer to lvi. 6, 7 as show-
ing the utmost hopes held out to
the Gentile proselytes; to Ixi. 6,
where the restored Jews are dis-
tinguished from the Gentiles by the
title ‘priests of Jehovah ;’ and to
Ixvi. 22, where the permanence of
the Jewish race appears to be
guaranteed. On the other hand,
it may fairly be urged that a special
privilege granted to a select few
does not affect the general inferi-
ority of the Gentile to the Jew.
The spirit of the context points
decidedly to a throwing open of
the gates as widely as possible.
When the Gentiles are converted,
a larger number of temple-officers
will become necessary, and the
same divine mercy which accepted
the converts will select those of
them who are suitable to minister
in holy things, even at the cost of
breaking through the exclusive Le-
vitical system. This seems to be
confirmed by the parallel passage at
the end of Zechariah. See also on
Ixi. 6, And unto the Levites]
Both this and alt. read. presuppose
that a distinction in rank between
the Aaronite priests and the or-
dinary Levites continues; this is
marked by the repeated preposition
in the Hebr. (comp. Deut. xviii. 1,

Jer xxxiii. 18, where the preposition
is not repeated). The prophet in
this respect occupies the point of
view of the Levitical legislation. It
is important therefore to determine
the time when he lived.

* x make] Strictly, ‘I am
about to make.’ Your name]
Perhaps alluding to the ‘new name’
which was to supersede Israel (1xii.
2, Ixv. 15).

°° From new moon to new
moon] The old forms of worship
have been reduced to the utmost ;
new moons and sabbaths alone re-
main. ‘All flesh’ attends in the
temple on these hallowed occasions
(comp. the similar anticipation in
Zech. xiv. 16),—Is all this to be
taken literally? Does the prophet
mean that the old conditions of
time and space will have ceased?
Or is the language figurative? The
latter view is certainly nearer the
truth than the former. ‘It is
already the revelation which our
Lord makes to the Samaritan
woman (John iv. 21). The literal
meaning was physically impossible ;
and so it was plain that he (Isaiah)
spoke of a worship other than that
at any given place’ (Dr. Pusey’).
Still the prophet has but a confused
vision of this great spiritual change.
He cannot give up the idea of the
religious supremacy of Jerusalem ;
at the same time, he cannot ex-
clude any from communion with
God merely on the ground of their
local distance from the temple.
Hence the strange inconsistencies
in his picture,

L Prophecy of Fesus, &c., a sermon (1879), p. 39.

r42

ISAIAH,

[cHAaP. LXVI.

shall come to worship before me, saith Jehovah. * And they
shall go out and look upon the carcases of the men who

2) and they shall go out] viz.,
to the hills and valleys around
Jerusalem, where the Divine judg-
ment has taken place. It is, of
course, the old and not the new
Jerusalem of which the prophet is
thinking. ——And look upon] 1.¢.,
look with awful interest upon.
(Comp. Ps. xci. 8, and for the idiom,
Isa. Ixvi. 5, Gen. xxi. 16, xliv. 34.)
For their worm shall not die,
and their fire shall not be
quenched] Three questions arise
in considering this passage: 1. Is
it the world of men or of souls
which is the scene of the torments ?
2. if the latter, how far are we to
interpret the description in a ma-
terial sense? and 3. in what sense
is everlastingness here predicated
of the fire and the worm? 1. As
to the scene of the torments. The
context naturally leads us to sup-
pose that the reference is to the
bodies of the slain, lying unburied
upon the ground ; and this view is
partly confirmed by the parallel
passage in Zechariah (xiv. 12). On
the other hand, the details of the
description suggest, by their ob-
vious inconsistency, that the terms
are symbolic of the tortures of the
souls in Hades. This is the view
embodied in the Targum, which
renders the second half of the verse
thus: ‘Because their souls shall not
die, and their fire shall not be
quenched, and the ungodly shall be
judged in Gehenna, until the righte-
ous say concerning them, ‘We have
seen enough ;’ it also underlies the
solemn warning of Jesus, ‘It is
better for thee to enter into Life
maimed, than having two hands to
go into Gehenna, into the fire that
never shall be quenched ; where
their worm dieth not, and the fire
is not quenched’ (Mark ix. 43, 44,
comp. 45-48).!_ Both views being
so strongly supported, we must, I

think, endeavour to combine them,
and the study of primitive beliefs
may suggest a way. The eschato-
logy of the Bible is symbolic, and
its symbols are borrowed (with that
large-hearted tolerance which we
have so often had to notice) from
the popular forms of belief respect-
ing the unseen world. Now it is
one of the most primitive and most
tenacious of these forms of belief
that the soul itself has a kind of
body, without which indeed those
phantom-visions in which all races
have believed would be impossi-
bilities. As soon as men begin to
reflect, however rudely, upon this
belief, the theory arises that there
are different kinds of spirit, or soul.
Some primitive races say that man
has three souls ; some, that he has
four; but a simpler and more
natural idea is that he has two.
This is said to be the belief of the
Algonquins, a tribe of North Ameri-
can Indians ;* it also appears to
have been current upon the banks
of the Nileand of the Jordan. The
Egyptian priests, who were never
ashamed of the archaic basis of
their theology, taught this doctrine
—that after the separation of soul
and body in death, the soul went
through a series of trials in Amenti
or Hades, not however as a pure
spirit, but accompanied by an
ezdolon of the cast-off body ; mean-
time the body remained in the
upper world, seemingly inanimate,
but really still possessing a kind of
soul, the pale reflection of the soul
in Amenti. The Book cf Job, so
full of references to popular beliefs,
and so abundant in illustrations of
II. Isaiah, contains a passage which
presupposes a closely analogous
belief among the Jews. After ex-
pressing an earnest desire for a
second life upon earth, the suffering
patriarch falls back into despond-

1 Gehenna, according to Jesus (see Matt. x. 28) as well as according to the Tar-

gum, is a place where both soul and body undergo punishment.

Xvi. 24.
2 Tylor, Primitive Culture, i. 392.

Comp. Luke

CHAP. LXV1.]

ISAIAIL,

133

rebelled against me, for their worm shall not die, and their fire

ency, as he recalls to mind the
melancholy consequences of death.
‘Thou overpowerest him for ever,
and he goeth ; changing his face,
and thou sendest him away. His
sons come to honour, and he
knoweth it not ; they become mean,
and he observeth them not. Never-
theless, his flesh upon him feeleth
pain, and his soul upon him mourn-
eth’ (xiv. 22). In the Book of
Isaiah itself we have met with one
doubtful trace of the belief in a
duplicate body (see on lvii. 2), and
the Book of Ezekiel has, in a highly
imaginative passage, a sufficiently
distinct reference to it (Ezek.
xxxil. 25). A kindred belief is pre-
supposed in the passage before us.
The delivered Israelites are repre-
sented as going out to behold a
signal instance of righteous retri-
bution. What they see can be
only the corpses of their enemies.
But the prophet continues in terms
which properly can only kelong to
the souls in Hades. How is this?
It is because of the supposed double
consciousness of soul and body.}
Just as, according to primitive be-
lief, ‘the mutilation of the body will
have a corresponding effect upon
the soul,’? so the tortures of the
soul in Hades will be felt in some
degree by the corpse on earth.
The emphasis in the prophetic
statement is of course not on
the sympathy of soul and body,
but on the sense of punishment
which the personalities of the guilty
ones shall never lose (comp. 1. 11
end). 2. As to the materiality of
the torments of the guilty souls.
By the inconsistency of the de-
scription, the prophet clearly warns
us not to understand it literally.
The Egyptian authors of the Book
of the Dead would have equally

deprecated a literal interpretation
of the torments of the condemned.
The eschatology of the Bible, as has
been already stated, is symbolic ;
the prophet, like the other men of
God, speaks in figures. His sym-
bols are borrowed partly from the
valley of Hinnom, which had for-
merly been the scene of the burnt
sacrifices to Moloch (comp. on lvii.
5), and afterwards became the re-
ceptacle of the filth of Jerusalem,
and partly (as we have seen) from
the popular imaginations respect-
ing the soul. We must be on our
guard, however, against supposing
that the kernel of his symbols is a
mere abstraction. This would be
high treason against his Semitic
origin and his prophetic calling.
There is no reasonable doubt that
material torments form a very de-
finite part of his eschatology. In
one essential point, however, our
prophet is distinguished from later
non-prophetical writers, viz., his
self-restraint in referring to the
unseen world. He refrains as
much from elaborate pictorial de-
scriptions as from dogmatising. 3.
As to the everlastingness of the
torments. Did the prophet merely
mean ‘that nothing should put
the fire out, while any portion of
the carcases remained to be de-
voured—that it should be un-
quenchable zzti7 it had done its
work, and all was entirely con-
sumed?’ And in the application
of the figure to the soul, that
pangs of conscience should con-
tinue to afflict the guilty ones
until they were purified thereby ?
This at any rate does not seem
to have been the interpretation of
the early readers of the prophecy.
Not to quote again the words of
our Lord, the proverbial use of the

1 Compare the Aramaic and Talmudic use of ~efesh in the sense of a funerary

stele, which has even a point of contact in the Old Testament.

See Deut. xxvi. 14,

which proves, if we follow the Septuagint, that just as the Egyptians brought obla-
tions to the 4a, or ‘double,’ resident in the statue of the dead, so the Jews did to the
nefesh (‘soul’) of the dead. Comp. also the Arab belief in the sada“ of the dead,

the owl which haunts the grave (Hamdsa, p. 400 Freytag, Schol. ii. 72).

Smith, Academy, March 18, 1883, p. 189,
2 Tylor, Primitive Culture, i. 407.

See W. R.

134

ISAIAII.

(CHAP. LXVI.

shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abomination unto

all flesh.

fire and the worm in Sirach vii. 17,
Judith xvi. 17,'! would hardly have
arisen, if the Jewish people had
given the phrases so mild a mean-
ing. But the theory mentioned
may I think be refuted out of the
Book of Isaiah itself, where we
read (xxxiv. 10) respecting the fire
with which guilty dom is threat-
ened, that it shall be. quenchless,
and that its smoke shall go up for
ever, so that ‘none shall pass
through’ Edom ‘ for ever and ever.’
There is no arricre pensce here ;
the everlastingness spoken of is
absolute and without qualification.
The phrase ‘perpetual burnings’
(xxxill. 14, see note) has quite
another reference. An abomi-
nation] The Hebr. word (déraén)

only occurs again in Dan. xii. 2
(which, from the context, appears
to be an allusion to our passage).
—Such is the awful picture with
which the Book of Israel’s Con-
solation closes. Is there not an
incongruity in this? The early
Jewish critics appear to have
thought so. They directed that
when this chapter (or the last chap-
ter of the Minor Prophets, the
Lamentations, and Ecclesiastes)
was read, the last verse but one
should be repeated to correct the
sad impression of the last. One
cannot but sympathise with them.
But how should there not be a dif-
ference between the Old Testa-
ment and the New?

1 Mr. E. White is carried too far by his controversial bias, when he accuses the
post-Christian writer of Judith of ‘going beyond prophecy, and yielding to the influ-
ence of a philosophical doctrine of an immortality learned from Greece and Egypt, and
not found in his national Scriptures’ (Life ix Christ, 3rd ed., p, 170).

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

1 7. ot, the reading of the text, may be either the gen. of the
subject or of the object. If of the subject, the whole phrase will
mean ‘like a subversion in which strangers (or, enemies) are the
agents.’ If of the object, ‘like a subversion of strangers’ land.’
The former meaning is natural in itself, but there are three objec-
tions to it: (a) that a gen. standing alone after an infinitive or a
noun used infinitivally is, according to usage, a gen. of the object
(see Deut. xxix. 22, Jer. xlix. 18), (4) that papnn is the standing term
for the catastrophe of Sodom and Gomorrah (which is also an ob-
jection to Dr. Neubauer’s suggestion ot), and (c) that the context
shows that Sodom is in the mind of Isaiah here. The latter meaning
has only one argument against it, viz. that it is forced, and requires
us to take pm in different senses in two successive lines. It is
better therefore to suppose that nr was written either carelessly (the
word having occurred just before) or by design, from a patriotic
motive, instead of nip. Against Lowth’s conjecture ny, see my
Notes and Criticisms, ad loc. (Ibn Ezra supposed p+ to be a col-
lateral form of D7.) Prof. Robertson Smith also accepts Dy1D.

I. 9. pupa. To attach this word to the first half of the verse
makes this disproportionately long. Geiger! has shown that the old
Jewish students of Scripture (represented by the Versions) were
startled by some of the hard things said of Israel, and substituted
milder expressions. He even thinks that the text was sometimes
gently touched from the same patriotic motive. Certainly in this
verse, if anywhere, we may assume a softening interpolation ; that
the judges should be called ‘judges of Sodom’ might be tolerated,
but that the entire people should, even in a hypothesis, be likened to
Sodom, was too great a shock. Three of the versions (Sept., Pesh.,
Vulg.) omit the word, and the fourth (Targ.) gives a rendering which
clearly reveals a dissatisfaction with the text, even in its mitigated
form :; the offence remained, to the author of this rendering, even
after the insertion of the gloss. It seems to me possible that a
similar feeling of national complacency dictated the change of op
into ot in z. 7.

IL 12, 8 nin. Read ‘b nixy?, and see note in ZCA., p. 39.

1 Urschrift und Uebersetzungen der Bibel (Breslau 1857), p. 346, Kc.

136 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

Geiger! has shown by a number of passages that the authors of the
points and the early translators took great offence at the expression
“to see God.’ Hence, they frequently modify this phrase ; but as
where one modifies it another sometimes does not, we are now and
then able to produce documentary evidence that the original reading
has been changed. It was enough (or seemed enough) to change
the vowels ; the letters of the text were allowed to remain. Yet it is
doubtful whether the reading of the points in the present case is
even grammatically admissible, not so much on account of the as-
sumed syncope of 4, which Bottcher and Stade in their grammars
call in question (for even if the Massoretic pointing in the four other
supposed cases of syncopated infin. Nifal be erroneous, yet the prin-
ciple of such a syncope is assured by the admitted examples of syn-
copated Hifil—see, e.g., iii. 8, xxiii. 11), as because of the prepositional
use of 195, which only occurs elsewhere in two passages precisely
analogous to the present (Ex. xxili. 15, xxxiv. 20). Del. in his 3rd ed.
admits the plausibility of this argument (‘vielleicht aber eben nur
vielleicht richtig ’).—The same offence at the anthropomorphism, ‘to
see God,’ dictated the Sept. version of xxxviii. 11 (see vol. i., p. 229,
note )),

1. 13.4. aqyyy pix. The rendering adopted has been objected to as
giving the Vav a kind of sarcastic value. But the Vav of association,
though commoner in Arabic, is not unknown in Hebrew (see below
on vii. 1). Auth. Vers. is grammatically less probable. For the
principle of the Hebrew idiom, see Driver (Hebrew Tenses, § 197,
obs. 2), who compares Jer. xiii. 27.

1. 24. Siwy wax. Possibly the pointing is due to a wish on the
part of the Massoretes to exclude the translation ‘steer of Israel’ as
too suggestive of idolatry. ‘wv’ aN might, in fact, have been so
translated ; comp. the figurative ‘bulls of Bashan,’ and the title of
bull frequently applied to the Egyptian sun-god Amen, to express
divine youth and strength (7. S. B. A., ii. 252).

1. 29. Read wan. Errors in the pronominal affixes were so easy
that there is no merit in retaining the harsh transition of the text.
Comp. xlii. 20, xliv. 28, lili, ro.

u. 6. Sept. renders the first part, dre éverA7joOn ws Td dz’ dpyjs [so
all the old versions] 4 yépa aitéy KAydSovopdv. Hence Lowth and
Roorda would restore DIPS ODP. This is very plausible (or we
might read DOP), but perhaps it makes the clause a trifle heavy ; it
was not sorcery alone that came ‘from the East,’ and the last clause
has probably no connection with religion. (The simplest correction
of all is Krochmal’s opp). 4pBY is hard. PAD, ‘to strike,’ is only

VUrschrift und Ucberselsungen der Bibel, pp. 337-9

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 137

used of indignation or scorn, Num. xxiv. 10, Job xxvii. 3, but Arab.
gafaga means to strike hands in a bargain (whence ¢a/ga, ‘a bar-
gain’). Another plausible rendering is ‘applaud,’ the sense of the
Arabic agfaga (=pnyn). See further my Motes and Criticisms.

ll. 16. 7ONNn nvow. ‘w is evidently the same as nyawn, which
occurs in Num. xxxiii. 52 (comp. Lev. xxvi. 1),.in the sense of
‘carved idolatrous obelisks,’ and in Prov. xxv. 11 of ‘ chased (silver)
vessels.’ The (Aramaic) root is nay ‘to pierce through,’ ‘to distinguish,’
and hence ‘to look at.’ The Vulgate and Saadya have understood the
phrase to mean all kinds of ornaments ; but the usage of the word
mw (comp. also Ezek. viii. 12) favours the view that some sort of
imagery was represented on the foreign works of art referred to. The
wider meaning ‘ objects which attract the gaze’ is, however, amply
defensible on the analogy of the Aramaic Ahezvdé and Assyrian /a-
martu, both used of costly things, and both from roots meaning ‘to see.’
Ewald’s ‘watch-towers of pleasure’ is derived from the Peshito, and
confirmed by the Aramaic my3p ‘watch-tower,’ but has the Hebrew
usage against it, and is scarcely suitable at the close of the catalogue.

Ill. 10. WON. The present reading is no doubt grammatically
defensible (cf. Gen. i. 4, vi. 2), but it is weak. Correct, with Duhm,
we (comp. xxxii. 20), thus completing the parallelism between v. 10
and v. 11. Lowth suggested we DN.

ll. 12. ytv39 here without connoting oppression ; comp. Ix. 17,
Zech. x. 4. The plural is to be explained as a construction xara
ctveow. The thought of the prophet was, ‘My people’s governors
are a petulant child and the court women.’ He began to write this
down and then broke up the clause into two, to produce a rhythmic
parallelism (comp. xli. 27, Zeph. iii. 10).

I. 25. yn, A poetic archaism (see Moles and Criticisms, ad
Joc.). The Assyrian cognate mu, and the Ethiopic me¢, are both used
for ‘husband’ (properly ‘man’). In Hebrew usage o'np always im-
plies dependence or weakness (the former even in Job xix. 19, Job
being described as a kind of emir). It does not appear to connote
fewness ; else there would be no occasion for the familiar compound
phrase pp sn (Gen. xxxiv. 30, &c.). Hence in xli. 14, we should
render ‘petty folk’ (Sept. wrongly éAvyoorés). ‘ Dependents’ would
probably be the best general rendering ; this will include warriors
(implied here) and household servants (see Job xxxi. 31).

Iv. 3-6. Several questions arise out of this difficult passage.
First is v. 4 the protasis of v. 3 (Delitzsch), or of v. 5 (Ewald, ren-
dering v. 5, ‘then Yahveh shall make,’ &c.)? Its position favours
the latter view, but the sense imperiously requires the former. <Ac-
cording to Stade, vv. 2, 3, 4 have been misplaced, and the right
order is 4, 3, z, and with v. 2 he closes the prophecy, vz. 5, 6 being,

138 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

he thinks, the addition of an editor during the Exile (Zettschrift fiir
die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, 1884, pp. 149-151). Certainly the
last two verses of the chapter are in harmony with the tone of
thought of the exile-prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. viii. 6, x. 19, xi. 23,
xliii, 1-4), not to mention IL. Isa. lii. 8, lxiii. 17. They also con-
tain a word unique in this part of the book, and specially character-
istic of II. Isaiah (see commentary on xl. 26). But may we ox this
account alone deny that Isaiah wrote wa (so Wellhausen, Gesch.
Israels, i. 350 note)? Granting that x12 is an Aramaism, does it follow
that every Aramaism in Isaiah is a corruption? Ryssel has already
pointed out how growing an influence was exerted by Aramaic from
the times of Ahaz onwards (De Elohiste Pentateuchi sermone, Lips.
1878, p. 25), and the period of Ahaz is suitable for the date of
chap. iv. That xya is of Aryan origin is a purely personal hypo-
thesis of Lagarde’s and Wellhausen’s. We find the Assyrian cognate
(in the Shafel form) in the Assyrian deluge-story, used of the divine
causation of a dream (Haupt in K.4.7), ed. 2, pp. 60, 500).

On tv. 5, 6. There is only one alternative to the supposition in the
commentary, and that is to let 7. 5 run on into z. 6 (so Hitz., Naeg.,
and virtually Del.), rendering, ‘For over all that is glorious shall a
canopy and a pavilion arise.’ But the figure seems more striking with
npD alone. Is nBn genuine ?

v. 1. “yt nw. For the objection to the ordinary view, see my
note ad Joc. The phrase should probably be explained, on the
analogy of oi 3a ‘bed of love’ (Ezek. xxiii. 17), ‘a song of
love,’ i.e. ‘a lovely song.’ Two ways of exp'aining the "44 of the
text are open to us. (a) It may be an example of the popular
apocopated plural (2 for zm), recognised by Ewald in 2 Sam. xxii. 44
(Ps. cxliv. 2), Lam. ili, 14, Cant. vill. 2, and perhaps Ps. xlv. 9
(Lehrbuch, § 177 a). If Ewald (Die Dichter des Alten Bundes, ii.
425) may be followed, we have another instance of »y4 for pyy7 in
Cant. vii 10, but this is very doubtful. But although the Himya-
ritic plural of tens is formed by 7 without the z which should follow,
I question whether the second mode of explanation (0) is not better,
not only for Isa. v. 1 (which is of included by Ewald in his instances
of the apocopated plural), but for the other passages quoted above.
Bishop Lowth writes, ‘{There is in all such cases] a mistake of
the transcribers, by not observing a small stroke, which in many
MSS. is made to supply the o of the plural, thus 4)7.’ See below,
on lili. 8.

v. 13. For sn read ‘9, with Hitz. &c. ; comp. Deut. xxxii. 24.
An crror of the ear rather than of the eye.

v. 17. I have quoted Sept. as reading oma ‘kids,’ following
Ewald. But it is quite possible that Sept. read pyy3. Dr. Weir

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 139

retains O%3 ‘sojourners,’ ic. nomad shepherds, comparing 2 Sam.
iv. 3, Jer. xxxv. 7, But 03 really hangs together with the unten-
able Jewish view of the verse as a promise to the faithful (Targ.,
Pesh., Kimchi, and so Calv., Vitr.). See Buhl, Zestschr. f. kirchliche
Wissenschaft, 1883, pp. 231-2. 0°) is more obstinate than p73.
In eds. 1 and 2 I assumed a twofold meaning of the phrase, in which
it occurs—‘ the ruins of the rich’ (Ps. xxii. 29, Ixxviii. 31), and ‘the
ruins of (destined for) the fatlings’ (Ps. Ixvi. 15). But this is too subtle
for Isaiah, and I now follow an anonymous writer (in the Journal of
Sacred Literature, n.s., vol. iv., pp. 328-343) in supposing a clerical
error. The codex primarius, from which all extant Hebrew MSS.
ultimately spring, may have had om‘onaan—a combination of two
readings with different suffixes. Not understanding this, a scribe
would easily alter bm’p into pn. The remaining correction 97379
needs no defence.

v. 30. 81 W¥. Del. claims the authority of the points for his
rendering, but the Massoretes (as Buhl has pointed out) meant us to
_understand ‘moon and sun,’ as Saadya and other Jewish scholars
after them (see Rashi and A.E.).

For the dz. dey, DD y Friedr. Del. compares the Assyr. é7pitu
‘cloud’ (Hebrew and Assyrian, pp. 15, 20).

vi. 6. npys Ges., Hitz., Knob., Luzzatto, render ‘hot stone’
(Ghihstein, pietra infuocata), and refer to the Eastern custom of
cooking food on stones heated in a fire (comp. 1 Kings xix. 6, 97).
But mpy is not necessarily a ‘hot stone,’ see Esth. i. 6, &c., and for
post-Biblical Hebrew, Joma, i. 7.! (Vulg. calculus ; Ewald, Stiickstetn.)

vir. 1. 55% x). The singular is used, because Pekah is only an
appendage to his more powerful neighbour. The V4av before his
name is that of association (=‘ together with’); see i. 13 4, xiii. 9,
xlii. 5, xlvili. 16 4, li. 19, and, for other examples, Ewald, Lehrbuch d. h.
Spr., § 339 @ (or see Kennedy’s transl. of Ewald’s Syntax).

On vu. 8, 9. (See end of note.) The corruption of 7p .px
(Asnapper) from $p3(37]Jpx (Assurbanipal) is easy. Two letters only
had become effaced in the manuscript from which Ezra iv. 9, 10
was copied. Friedr. Delitzsch, Paradies, p. 329, in adopting this iden-
tification (due to Dr. Haigh?), remarks that Assurbanipal was the
conqueror of Susa, and that the Susanchites are among the nations
which Asnapper transported to N. Israel (Ezra iv. 9, 10).

vu. 14. mobyn.—Dr. Pusey has published his view of the ren-
dering and etymology of mnby in a learned note to a university
sermon. See Prophecy of Jesus, &c., Oxford, 1879, pp. 48-51. With
characteristic independence, he boldly defends the rendering ‘vir-
gin,” and the connection of moby with pby ‘to hide.’ His argu-

1 Siegfried, review of 4.C.A., in Hilgenfeld’s Zez/schri/t, 1872, p. 179.

140 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

ments are drawn partly from the Biblical usage of mpby, partly
from the superior suitability which he attributes to the native
Hebrew root. He remarks incidentally that the rendering ‘ young
woman’ deprives the prophecy of its emphasis—a criticism which I do
not understand, for would not the article prefixed render any noun
emphatic? On the latter, he is really suggestive ; at any rate, one or
two of the facts which he has adduced from the Arabic lexicon throw
some valuable light on the syzonymzk of the Semitic languages. For
instance, d7zt in Arabic (like N32 in Hebrew) is used in the sense of
‘girl ;? anda synonym for dz¢ is Aadat, evidently derived from the
root fabaa, ‘to hide,’ and meaning ‘a girl kept in the tent,’ ie. ‘not
yet married’ (Lane, pp. 692-3). Dr. Pusey, however, does not go
so far as to include fadaa among the four roots from which, he re-
marks, as many distinct groups of words signifying ‘virginity’ are
derived ; and he will hardly deny that the Arabic gu/am, ‘a young
man, youth, boy, or male child’ (Lane), is derived from the root galina,
commonly rendered ‘coéundi cupidus esse,’ but more accurately (for
the Arabic lexicon only gives the coarsened Arabic usage, not the fun-
damental meaning) ‘ maturus esse.’ Dr. Pusey infers that pnby might
have the same meaning as fadat ; I follow the majority in inferring
that it might be synonymous with gw/dmat (fem. of gulam). There
would be no objection to his theory of the etymology, if mpby stood
alone in the Semitic vocabulary, if DPy and DD>y, and the ana-
logues of ody and nngby in Arabic and Aramaic, were non-existent
—if, that is, niby were not a member of a widely-spread family of
words which require to be accounted for in the same way. When it
can be shown that Aramaic and Arabic had a root pby ‘to hide,’
Dr. Pusey’s argument will gain greatly in cogency. I admit, of
course, that the etymology does not necessarily agree with the usage
of a word (Dr. Pusey well refers to the Arabic 4zk7, ‘a virgin,’ but
etymologically only ‘a young woman’), but I urge that in the case of
ndy and DyDoY it does so agree, and that the context of Isa. vii. 14
does not compel us to decide that ndya has any but the etymo-
logically correct rendering ‘the young woman,’ May I, in conclusion,
suggest that the zwance which galima has acquired in Arabic should
not be confounded with the fundamental meaning? It seems to me
as if Dr. Pusey’s natural aversion to Arabian coarseness has impeded
him in the critical use of the Arabic vocabulary.

On the Biblical usage I have spoken at length elsewhere. It so
happens that the context of the other passages where ppdy occurs
(Ps. Ixviii, 26, 1 Chr. xv. 20 are hardly exceptions) favours a reference
to an unmarried woman. But this proves nothing with regard to our
passage, the context being indecisive. With regard to the versions,

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. I4!

we have no ground for pressing the Sept. rendering rap8évos (comp.
Pesh. &’¢hidta), which may of course be used loosely like vérgo (comp.
Gen. xxiv. 55, where it is the Sept. rend. of nyin). The ddxpudos
of Aquila, Gen. xxiv. 43, may be safely disregarded. Critical ety-
mologies were not the forte of the Jews or their pupils. Delitzsch
remarks with laconic positiveness, ‘The assertion of Jerome, Hebra-
icum maby nunguam nisi de virgine scribitur, significat enim puellam
virginem absconditam, defended by Vercellone in a lengthy lecture, is
untenable’ (_/esaza, ed. 3, p. 115, note 3).

vil. 15. inv. Lit. ‘towards his knowing,’ ie., about the time of
his knowing. Comp. Judg. xx. 10 pxiad ‘when they shall come.’ No
other rendering suits the context.

VIL. 25. ‘iy new ian-nd. The rendering of Vitr. and Ew.
is variously explained (according to Ew., ‘there is not even the fear
of thorns, for they are allowed to grow up anywhere undisturbed,
which is very unnatural); but in any case the contrast between the
present renunciation of agriculture and the past careful pursuance
of it is entirely lost. The construction preferred is not indeed free
trom awkwardness (M8) would have been simpler) ; but it is the
fault, not of Isaiah, but of the early editor of chap. vii. (see vol. i.
Pp. 42).

vil. 2. Read myn. Comp. Ezek. v. 2, py for pan.

vil. 9. mm) has been repeated accidentally from the second
verse-half (Gratz).

vul. 15. po. Most critics render D3 ‘among them,’ which is weak
in itself, and leaves the verse rather isolated. I prefer, with Ges. and
Hitz., to attach the word to the verb (comp. Jer. vi. 21, xlvi. 12). The
plural is however less natural than the singular (for the ‘stone’ and
the ‘rock’ are but one), and I therefore adopt Prof. de Goeje’s sugges-
tion (Revue critique, May 8, 1875) to point O32, and explain on the
analogy of liii. 8 (see below), é being in all probability a Phcenicio-
Hebrew pronominal suffix form for the 3rd pers. masc. sing.

vil. 19. Sept. renders the last clause of this verse, ré éxfyrodot
mept tov Lévrwv tovs vexpovs,; Did Sept. read ws 4'-np? or are the
first two words simply an interpretation ?

vi. 19 4. We might also bridge over the two parts of the verse
by supplying mentally, ‘then answer ye,’ comp. Ps. viii. 3, 4. In
Z. C. A. the difficult phrase ‘their gods’ was explained, ‘the
spirits of the departed national heroes,’ comp. 1 Sam, xxviii. 13.
According to this view, endorsed by Prof. J. E. Carpenter (AZodern
Review, Jan. 1881, p. 13), and proposed afresh by Dr. Buhl, ‘the
necromancers and wizards had their eager crowds of followers, who
proclaimed that nothing was more natural than that the people should

142 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

have resort to their Elohim, the living consult the dead.’ The pro-
phet attempts to open their eyes by placing their words in a context
which reveals their absurdity. I find in my own copy of Z. C. A. this
manuscript criticism upon myself, ‘But would the ghosts be called
“their gods”? Elohim they might be, but the personal pronoun
surely makes the relation too intimate.’ In any case, we must not
illustrate the passage by xxvill. 15.

vill. 21. Dean Perowne, a little differently, ‘If they shall not
speak according to this word, when they have no dawn of light, [ir
they shall still refuse God’s revelation, ] then (v. 21) they shall pass
along,’ &c. (Sermons, p. 376.) But v. 21 reads rather like a continua-
tion than as the apodosis of a sentence.

vill. 22. nop mbps. The sense ‘spread abroad,’ based only
upon Arab. zadaha, seems precarious ; but ‘driven (upon him)’ is
fairly supported by 2 Sam. xv. 14, Deut. xx. 19 (Naeg.). m9 must
be explained as in apposition, ‘ caligo—propulsum.’ The alternative
rend., ‘he is thrust into darkness’ (comp., with Rashi, Jer. xxiii. 12)
spoils the parallelism. Sept. renders by guess, xal oxéros wore py
BAérev. The text seems doubtful.

vill. 21, 22. The transposition of these verses is made (on the
analogy of many similar cases in the Sept. and elsewhere) in order to
soften the transition to ix. 1. The mere difficulty of the proleptic
cllipsis of the noun to which the pronoun in 3 refers, is not great ;
comp. (with Del. on Hab. i. 5) xili. z, pab=wspnd ; Job vi. 29,
ma=wAI; Ps. ix. 13, ans, viz. ony.

On vu. 22, ix. 1-7 comp. Selwyn’s Hore Hebraice (Cambr.
1860), pp. 5-130.

IX. I. mypd>z. Most recent critics (not however Hitzig and Nol-
deke') have followed Ewald and Olshausen in abandoning the
traditional interpretation ‘shadow of death.’ It is certainly plausible
to point minds, thus assimilating the word to a large class of ab-
stract nouns. On the other hand, let it be remembered (r) that
Hebrew does possess both real and virtual compounds (comp. the
proper names Njp7¥N ‘death’s court’ and nypry ‘strong is death,’
also $63 ‘naughtiness, may ‘Jah’s darkness,’ mnzq¥ ‘Jah’s
flame’ 2), and (2) that in Job xxxviil. 17 nywby is undoubtedly used as
a parallel to Death or Hades. My own view is that the original pro-
nunciation was nD, and the original meaning ‘blackness’ or
‘darkness,’ but that, as no other offshoot of the same stem had sur-

1 See Hitzig on Isa. ix. 1, Ps. xxiii. 4, Job ili. 5, and Noldeke in Gétting. gelehrtle

Anszeigen, 1867, Bd. i., p. 456. It is worth adding that Prof. Néldeke has seen no
reason to change his opinion.

2 On Semitic compounds, sce Delitzsch, Fesurwn, p, 232 &c., Philippi, Hesea
u. U/rsprung des St. Constr. im Hebr., p. 49 &., and on the two last named (which
are contested by Ewald and Olshausen), comp. Geiger, VU schri/t, p. 276.

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 143

vived in Hebrew, the word passed into disuse, till Amos (v. 8) and
Isaiah (ix. 1) revived it. They and other religious writers needed
this fresh word to express ‘ deep gloom,’ and assumed a didactic ety-
mology (as was done for other words, e.g., 1, DIN, and probably
wrx) from >¥ and nyy. The author or authors of Job had a special
predilection for the word ; ten of the seventeen passages in which
the word is found occur in that poem. I argue upwards from Job
xxxvili. 17, where the sense ‘deadly shade’ seems required, but I
think that several other passages gain by supposing an allusion to the
darkness of Hades. I do not include among these Ps. xxiii. 4,
where ‘the valley’ referred to seems to me Hades itself. The stem
ody ‘to be dark’ is proved to be an old Semitic root by its occurrence
in Assyrian; see Schrader, K. A. 7, ed. 2, pp. 515, 581; Sayce,
LT. S. B. A., iii. 169. The view adopted in Miihlau and Volck’s
Gesenius, according to which mindy and pby ‘shade’ are connected
together, must be erroneous, as nby never means ‘shade,’ but always
(even Ps, xxxix. 7, Ixxili. 20) ‘an image,’ from pby ‘to cut out.’

1x. 3 [2]. 991 457 xb 9m. Selwyn conjectures byan, Krochmal better
ndvan (Ixv. 18). If we follow the K’ri, we must explain the position
of the pronoun, not as emphatic (as perhaps in Ixiii. 9), but as eu-
phonic (as xliii. 22, see commentary).

IX. 4. JND ND: ‘D Is an Aramaism adopted into Hebrew and
Ethiopic. The Syriac denominative verb in Pael is the rend. of
tmoddoat in Pesh. Acts xii. 8, but the Hebrew of course may mean
‘to go about shod,’ or (to suit the context) ‘to stamp.’ The Pesh.
translator confounded y)xp with psy (comp. Rashi). The Sept.
thought of Syr. zazzé ‘armour’ (crodA7) ; ‘shoe’ seems due to R.
Joseph Kimchi (see his son’s Book of Roots). The Targ. and Vulg.
have still worse guesses.
wna. Most render ‘in the tumult (of battle),’ but the
parallelism leads us to expect a qualification of the participle, and-
this produces a grander description.

Ix. 6. mann. Lagarde (Semmitica, i. 17) regards the nb as a
fragment of a half-illegible word in the MS. from which the scribe
was copying. Why should it not be a case of dirroypadia, niby
having been first of all written ‘ defectively’ nby? The verse would
then run more smoothly. ‘Increased (pointing, 727) is the govern-
ment, and peace hath no end,’ &c. (So Gratz, Geschichte, ii. 1, p-
223.) (naw is no doubt an Isaianic word, see xxxiii. 23, but we have
to account for the D clausum.)

Ix. 8. 123 might also be taken in the sense of ‘a thing’ as
1 Sam. xiv. 12), ie., in this case, an evil thing. So Nestle (Zheolog.
Literaturzeitung, 1878).

144 CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES.

IX. 10. My. Hitzig (on Job xxx. 13) conjectures "19 ‘helpers.’

1x. 16. Read ppp xb with Lagarde. nop is an Isaianic word
(xxxi. 5). True, the litotes in the text may be supported by Eccles.
iv. 16. But it gives a poor parallel to ony xb.

Ix. 18. pos ony. The sense is clearly given by ovyxéxavras (Sept.) 5
whether the Arab. ‘aa ‘to glow with heat,’ ‘a¢ ‘stifling heat,’ may
be compared, is a question (which Prof. R. Smith has finally settled
in the negative]. Comp. below, on xi. 15. Krochmal corrects
yuna any.

IX. 19. WW, 1. to cut up (meat) ; 2. to devour: cf. Arab. jaraza.

xX. 4. Prof. de Lagarde (letter in Academy, Dec. 15, 1870) pro-
poses to read ox nn ny ‘nda ‘ Beltis stoops, Osiris is con-
founded ;’ comp. xlvi. 1, Jer. 1. 2. Lagarde thinks that Beltis
(snbyq) and Osiris were worshipped by some of the Judahites. There
is, it is true, abundant evidence! of the worship of Beltis in Syria
at a later time ; but early testimony seems to be wholly wanting,
unless with Geiger we point ‘nba> in 2 Kings. xxiii. 10 (comp. v. 7
anwxd ovna).2. The form again is doubtful. If the deity intended
be the Babylonian Bilit, the form (as Mr. Sayce points out to me)
should be ynb>. In later Phcenician, the form was certainly nbya
(see de Vogiié’s S#le de Yehawmelek, p. 8), and the Greecised
BaaAris is from pbysa, not yndya (Schlottmann ; Schroder). Still less
is there any evidence that Osiris was ever a popular deity in Palestine.
True, Usir (Osiris) has been found in one Pheenician and in one
Cyprio-Pheenician proper name (see Corp. Jnscr. Semit., i. 68,
inscr. 46). It may perhaps be that Assir, in Ex. vi. 24, should be
Osir (comp. Hur, Ex. xvil. 10, probably=Horus), and that Amon,
the son of king Manasseh, is the same as the Egyptian Amen (=Ra,
the sun-god). Mosheh is no doubt Mesa (‘child’ or ‘son,’ a common
proper name under the Middle Empire); Pinehas may be ‘the negro’
(so Lauth and Brugsch); Ahi-ra (Num. i. 15) and Putiel (Ex. vi. 25)
may be half-Egyptian ; for the last comp. the Pet-Baal mentioned by
Brugsch.3 Still the general result of Old Testament study is to
reduce Egyptian influence on the Israelites within very narrow dimen-
sions. A sporadic reverence for either Osiris or Beltis would surely
not have been referred to in this context and in these terms.—The
case is not much improved if with Geiger‘ we take the Beltis in
Lagarde’s proposed reading as a symbol of Babylon, and Osiris of
Egypt. The fugitive Judahites would never think of taking refuge in

1 See Lagarde's note in Semética, Heft 1; Payne Smith, Thesaurus, p. 519 (Bilati
or Belati=the planet Venus in Syriac).

2 JFudische Zeitschrift, ii. 259. ‘This view is very questionable ; Jer. xxxii. 35 en-
titles us to expect Baal and not Beltis.

5 Putiel is thus explained by Mr. Tomkins, in ‘ Biblical Proper Names Illustrated,”
&e., Vitoria Institute Transactions, vol. xvi, 1882,

4 Jiidische Zeitschrift, ix, 119.

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 145

Assyria, when the Assyrians had but just ravaged Gilead and Naphtali
(ix. 1, 2 Kings xy. 29).! Prof. de Lagarde’s ingenious conjecture
must therefore on various grounds be decidedly rejected. Gladly
would we learn more of the popular religion of Palestine, but we
must not read our own fancies into the scanty records at our disposal.
(Sept. seems to have had a mutilated Hebrew text ; it renders by
Tod mi) éurreceiv els draywynv.)

x. 5 4. Prof. Driver’s note on this passage (Hebrew Tenses, § 201,
1 obs.) should be consulted ; he understands sym as an imperfect
anticipation of the subject, comp. Ezek. xi. 15 end. So Del. This
is possible, though the construction is, I think, a blot on a fine pas-
sage. There is no various reading of moment in the MSS., but
Sept. omits xin nu. Hitz., Ew. (ed. 1), and Diestel omit p35 xin
as an intrusive marginal gloss (comp. v. 24), but this leaves the
clause too short. Secker (in Lowth) plausibly corrects B43.

X. 13. TINT. . VOR Hitzig and Dr. Kay regard this as the
imperfect of habit (‘I am wont to. . .’), but this hardly suits the
context ; Ewald (so Prof. Driver, Hebrew Tenses, §§ 83, 84), as a vivid
way of representing past events as in course of happening, but yet
without implying at the same time the idea of sequence or causation.
The ‘tense’ is singularly appropriate here, as it is the one which
the Assyrian kings, for the same reason as Isaiah here, habitually use
in their inscriptions. Comp. on xii. 1.

x, 18. DO) DbIDD. A singular phrase ; can it be correct? ppp occurs
nowhere else in Kal, and though Dpi and ppinn are found in three
other places (lix. 19, Zech. ix. 16, Ps. lx. 6), none of them seem to
illustrate our passage. ‘It is easier,’ as Dr. Weir remarks, ‘to find
objections to all the various renderings which have been proposed,
than to say which is the true one. The ancient versions give very
little assistance.’ He suggests, however (in which I do not agree),
that some light is thrown upon the passage by xxxi. 8, 9.

x, 22, I take prin as qualifying ip.

x. 25. Luzzatto and Krochmal read pA) Sam-by ; but, as Diestel
remarks, the next stage was to be, not the cessation of Jehovah’s
anger against Assyria, but its manifestation on a larger scale. The
‘indignation’ spoken of in the opening words was the judgment
upon Judah (comp. z. 12).

On x. 27, 28. Prof. Robertson Smith offers a very tempting
emendation of the four corrupt words which close v. 27, viz.
TW jipyp nby: San. (See below.) His argument is elaborate, and
is connected with an interesting explanation of the mention of Migron,
which has puzzled some critics.

1 Hitzig in Hilgenfeld’s Zez¢schrift, xv. 228.
VOL, II. L

146 CRITICAL AND PIIITILOLOGICAL NOTES.

From his article in the Journal of Philology, 1884, I venture to
quote the following interesting suggestions. ‘There isa good reason
why the description should begin here, for in the 8th century, as in
the time of Saul, the pass of Michmash was no doubt the frontier of
the land of Benjamin. An advance upon this pass must necessarily
take place by the road leading down from Dér Diwan (Ai, or Aiath);
and. . , the arrival at Ai and the formation of the army on the
rolling plateau between that point and the village of Michmash
would be the first thing visible to watchmen at Geba or Gibeah.
The exact nature of the operations described depends on the loca-
lisation of Migron. I think it easiest to suppose that this is the
same place as the Migron which appears in 1 Sam. xiv. 2 as the
furthest outpost of Saul’s position at Gibeah. . . . Saul held Migron
to check a further southward advance of the Philistines. It lay
south of the pass ; but this is the situation which fits our text best.
The Assyrians would not attempt so dangerous an operation as the
crossing the pass of Michmash with their whole army without first
seizing a point on the other side, and Migron . . would be the very
point to secure. Moreover the advance from Ai to the village of
Michmash is a mere promenade of two or three miles by an easy
road through country not held by the Judzans, so that to place
Migron on this line and say “He has passed by Migron” would
have little force. I take 3 ray=Sy ray with 4 in its frequent usage
after verbs of attacking, and explain, ‘He has arrived at Aiath, he
has fallen on Migron,” i.e. has taken Migron by a coup-de-main.
The passage thus secured, the heavy baggage is left on the northern
side of the pass at the village of Michmash, and the army defiles
through the ravine.’ Prof. Smith confirms his emendation ‘y3) aby by
the remark, ‘No small place on the road beyond Ai would be visible
from the Judzan watch-towers, or could properly come into the
prophet’s vivid description. Beyond Ai the description must fall
into generalities,’ and he compares for }ypyp xiv. 31, Jer. i. 14, &c.

With regard to the reading of v. 27, a second verb in the second
clause is certainly wanted, and the comparison of xiv. 25 is greatly in
point. The Septuagint version evidently contains duplicate render-
ings, and the better one is kai xara@Oapyoera 6 Lvyds ad TOV dpwv
dpav. For Prof. Smith’s correction ym» he compares Job vii. 16.
The whole passage now runs, qosv Syp yap yD’ SAA OYA AYA

San saxry Syn sdyn

X. 33. MINB. Gesenius’s explanation, adopted in my translation
and also by Del., ‘foliage, lit. glory,’ seems not to suit the passages
(six in Ezekiel), in which 4985 occurs in the plural. The several
branches would not naturally each be called the ‘glory’ of a tree.
Better, therefore, to derive the word from the root par ‘to break

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 147

forth,’ and render ‘bough’ (see Ezek. xvii. 6), or collectively
‘ boughs.’

XI. 3. ‘2 nam. The phrase is without a parallel, and, as Bickell
has pointed out, has arisen out of a corrupt repetition of the pre-
ceding words.

x1. 4. For the second pry read pry with Krochmal and Lagarde.

x1. 7. Lagarde would read np yann.

XI Il. ob The fact that o»x and pm wy are specially
characteristic of chaps. xl.-Ixvi., renders it a little doubtful whether
Isaiah himself, wrote the latter phrase in this verse, which, indeed,
seems complete without it. It is possibly due to one of the Soferim
or Scripturists (see Essay vi.), who have so often supplemented the
records of prophecy. The earliest absolutely certain occurrences of
ps are in Jer. ii, 10, xxxi. 10, Would Isaiah have used pm »~ as a
technical phrase in but one passage of his ‘ occasional prophecies’ ?
nonp:. May we go further still, and regard this, too, as a
later addition, taking non as = xnonmx (Ecbatana), a form which
only occurs once (Ezra vi. 2)?

XI. 15. bya. Read Dyya with Ges. (Zhesaurus), Luz. and
Kr., » and y being easily confounded in the earlier stages of the
alphabetic characters. So perhaps Sept., Pesh., Vulg., though their
renderings may be mere guesswork (comp. Kimchi). To call in the
aid of the Arabic in this exceedingly plain piece of Hebrew seems
very dubious.

XI 1. 29MIN. . aw Prof. Driver suggests! that this may be
taken as a prayer (‘ May thine anger turn,’ &c.), comp. Ps. Ixxxv. 5
with 2-4, and cxxvi. 4 with 1-3. To me this does not seem natural,
as the next verse is entirely in the strain of thanksgiving. I would
not, however, assert that -1 is to be understood, but rather that the
construction with the imperfect, in poetic Hebrew as in epigraphic
Assyrian, is a vivid, emotional way of representing even past events
as in course of happening (comp. on x. 13). Whether another im-
perfect with simple Vav follows, makes no difference (see on the
other hand Delitzsch, whose references, however, scarcely prove his
case).

XU. 2. Mma Mb. The termination n, is not here a poetic
or archaic form, but a flexional form of the feminine 7, ; in fact, it
stands for ‘N, by an Aramaizing apocope of the suffix, and so also
in Ex. xv. 2, Ps. cxvili. 14. Why this apocopated form was preferred,
is a question variously answered. ‘It is Aosséble,’ thinks Prof. Driver
(following Bottcher, i. 241), ‘that the older language, dispensing
with superfluous letters, intended the » of the next word to do double

1 Hebrew Tenses, ed. 2, p. 261, note},

148 CRITICAL AND PIITLOLOGICAL NOTES.

duty, so that the whole would read mn 193)?’ Geiger, however, gives
a bolder and a more satisfactory explanation.’ It is well known that
the later Jews (even in the times of the Septuagint) scrupled to
pronounce the Tetragrammaton, and it is natural that the same
scruple (I speak of pre-Massoretic times) should have prevented the
pronunciation of the shorter form also. How could this be avoided ?
By connecting the syllable m) (wherever the sense appeared to allow it)
very closely with the preceding word, and slurring it over, so that the
hearer was not conscious of hearing the Divine name. Hence in
Ex. xv. 2, the Samaritan Pentateuch reads pinyin as one word, and
Sept. translates or paraphrases there Bonds Kal oxeracrys éyevero.
The later versions, however, express the 7, and it is in accordance
with this later abatement of scrupulousness that the Massoretic text
of Isa. xii. 2 introduces myn. It was apparently still the custom
among some public readers of the Scriptures to let the my be slurred
over and absorbed in the preceding word, and to make the true
sense quite clear the Massoretic critics inserted the full name jm»
(only here however, not in Ex. xv. 2, norin Ps. exvili. 14). (The
case is much stronger than can be shown in this condensed note.
Nor can inconsistencies on the part of the Massoretes be pleaded
against Geiger’s view ; perfect consistency is not a virtue even of
those laborious critics.)

xu 6. "IY. I now see from Friedr. Del. (Zhe Hebrew Lan-
guage, &c. p. 48) that in an Assyrian list of synonyms (IV A. L,
v. 28, 82 h) sad# is explained as a synonym of sak#, ‘to be high,’
and the next line contains the equation of sdd# and gablum, ‘ moun-
tain.’ Del. also quotes the phrase, Bi sadé rabi, ‘Bel the great
rock,’ and ‘ //u-sa@di’a, ‘God (is) my rock.’ If Shaddai once meant
‘rock,’ it must have been forgotten when the proper name (w7?-
shaddai (Num. i. 6, &c.) was framed. More probably it meant
‘high,’ or ‘high as a rock’ (intensive form from p4w.) These are
not too bold conjectures (comp. Gen. xlix. 24, Deut. xxxii. 18, 30,
&c.) When the origin had been forgotten, it was natural for the
prophetic writers to invent a connection with s4y. Comp. Ass. sadd
with Ar. saddu and suddu, both meaning ‘a mountain,’

XIII. 21, 22. oO»Yy .. ows. Bochart compares for the former
Arab. datwan, ‘a wild cat,’ and for the latter 22 awd, ‘a jackal.’
But if the latter word is strictly ‘a howler,’ it will equally well suit
the hyzena (elsewhere called yi2¥ or piay).

XIII, 21. ON ‘jackals.’ The oldest Babylonian texts refer to
an animal called “:-barra, who ‘ goes forth to seize the sheep,’ and
this word k-barra (literally, evil or wild dog) is translated in the
bilingual lists by the Assyrian a-4/iuv. Mr. Houghton acutely com-
bined this a-kAu with the Hebrew ’os/zm (plur.), only he mistrans-

’ Urschrift und Uelersetcungen der Bitel, pp. 274-8.

CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES. 149

lated the Accadian ‘striped dog,’ as if=‘hyzena.’ See Friedr. Del.,
The Hebrew Language viewed in the light of Assyrian Research, p. 34,
Hommel, Die semitischen Volker, p. 404, Houghton, 7: S. ZB. A.,
v. 328.

XII 22. DYN ‘wolves’? Cf. Arab. Anan, ‘a wolf.’

xIv. 6. Read n379 (» and n confounded, asin 2 Kings x 32,
where read, with Targ., Hitz., yy¥p)).

xiv. 21. ow. To the question, ‘Why should cities be denounced
so unqualifiedly ?’ (vol. i. p. 93), Dr. Weir replies by referring to the
view of the antitheistic origin of Babylon given in Gen. xi. ; how in-
genious, but how far-fetched ! Ibn Ezra, adopting Targ.’s rendering
‘enemies,’ compares 1 Sam. xxviii. 16, where, however, Sept.’s read-
ing is now generally adopted. (See Q. P. B.) With some hesitation
I read oy ; a similar correction is necessary in xxiv. 15, Ps. Ixxii. 9,
Jer. xlix. 3. (For other slight errors in this section, see xiii. 22,
xiv. 4, 6.)

XIv. 22. 33. Comp. Assyrian zinu ‘family’ (Friedr. Delitzsch,
Assyrische Studien, i. 20). So perhaps Ps. Ixxiv. 8, 03°3=‘ their
family.’

XIV. 23. ‘bP. This name probably came to the bittern from
its habit of erecting or bristling out the long feathers of the neck,
reminding one of the spines of the porcupine or hedgehog. In
Arabic, Syriac, and Ethiopic, the cognates actually mean the hedge-
hog ; in Talmudic the usage is uncertain. The variety of meaning
reminds one of parallel cases in the Semitic zoological vocabulary (see
on xxxiv. 7, and above on xxxv. I).

XIV. 30. )92. Hupfeld, on Ps. xxxvii. 20, suggests "193, comp.
7, z. 25. 9 is an Isaianic word (see xxx. 23).

——— yn. ‘Shall he slay.’ From a Semitic point of view, a

verb is never used impersonally. If there is no other subject, the
“nomen agentis’ of the verb is always either expressed or, as here,
implied. But who is ‘the slayer’ in this passage? Not Jehovah,
for he is the speaker, but the enemy who is Jehovah’s ‘rod’
(x. 5). (Comp. Hos. vi. 11, and Wiinsche’s note, to which I am
indebted.)
Xv. EL bs. If the pointing is correct, this must be a collateral
form of by (it occurs again in xxi. 11, but in pause). It is interest-
ing that it should occur in a A/oabdite inscription (on the stele of
Mesha, 1. 15, we have nbn ballélah). Comp. on xxiii. 11.

xv. 5. Sept. and Targ. both read ayy ab ‘the heart of Moab.’
mma. In eds. rt and 2 I ventured on a general ex-
pression of doubt as to the correctness of this word, which is want-
ing in the parallel passage, Jer. xlviii. 34. Sept. in Isaiah has év
avr}. This (mapa) may conceivably be the genuine reading, but
the view of the passage taken by Sept. rather suggests ‘from (some

150 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

place unknown)’ ; comp. Jer. xlviii. 34, where the verse runs ‘from
. unto... from... unto. .’

XV. 5. 3p for Myr), the only example of the dissolution of
a repeated consonant in a verb. The analogy of TAY for WINN
may justify it, ‘but it is very possible that the text has been injured’
(Olshausen, Lehrbuch der hebr. Sprache, § 253). Read syy with
Lagarde and some earlier scholars (see Ges.). yy in two senses
(see xvi. ro) like 34°. Comp. 49?¥) Job xxxix. 29, where Ges. and
Olsh. correct aydys,

XVI. 1. Gritz (Geschichte, ii. 1. 258), reads ‘Syyp sawe. He ex-
cises v. 2, and connects vv. 1 and 3.

xvi. 4. Lagarde’s edition of Targ. reads whubyyp=onn ; but
this is probably not the original reading—see Geiger’s Urschrift, p.
300 note, I therefore adhere to the statement in vol. i, Comp. the
mispointing in Gen. xlix. 26.

xvI. 10. $55 ‘planted or garden land,’ distinct from pp3
‘vineyards.’ The two senses are united in the Assyr. harmu.

xvi. 14 wap Nyo Read 1338 ; comp. vill, 23. Hoffmann
in Stade’s Zertschrift, 1883, p. 116.

XVII. 1. Omit ‘yp with Lagarde. The scribe had -yy in his head,
and began to write it over again. He would not spoil his manuscript
by excising it, and so it remained a non-word. See on xxviii. 25,
xlili. 12, and Q. P. B. (2nd ed.) on Zech. ii. 2, Mal. ii. 11.

XVIL 9g. WONT) Wann. In spite of 2 Chr. xxvii. 4 (cited in Com-
mentary) it is fair to ask whether ‘forests’ are natural places for for-
tresses? Even if (which is, I think, justifiable) we accept a second
meaning, ‘mountain-ridge,’ for win on Assyriological grounds,! yet
is it at all likely that qs would have been used in the sense of ‘the
summit of a hill’ so near to v. 6, where it means ‘the top of a tree’?
Sept. renders 6v zpdmov karéAurov of ’Apoppatot Kat of Evator, which
suggests Nm) ‘inn (Sept. has transposed the names). As Lagarde
points out (Semética, i, p. 31) wo and 5) look very similar in old
Hebrew characters, and might easily be confounded by a scribe.
Hitzig strangely renders ‘like the desolation of Horesh and Amir,’
comparing Harosheth (Judg. iv. 2). A resource of despair! though
Pesh., Theod., Saad., and (for Amir) Aq., Symm., are his predecessors.
Kocher and others explain, ‘like the few trees left when a wood has
been felled, or the very top of a tree when the boughs have been
stripped’ ; this might do, if ‘which they deserted’ &c., could be ex-

1 Tiglath-Pileser gives the epithet of sakwtz ‘high’ to £harsdné (plur. of Lharsz),
which certainly suits ‘mountain-top’ better than ‘forest’ (see passage in Norris's Ass.
Dict. s. v.). Friedr, Del. maintains that ‘mountain-ridge’ is the invariable meaning
of éharsu, and claims it as a sccond meaning for wp (The Hebr. Language Ke.

P. 17).

CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES. I51

cised. Is it possible that the strange story in Procopius and the
Jerusalem Talmud of Canaanitish fugitives in Africa (see Ewald,
fTistory, ii. 229, 230) may have some connection with this passage of
Isaiah ?

On xvi. 13. $353 properly'a whirl (Germ. /Virbel); then either (1)
a wheel (v. 28), or (2) a whirlwind (Ps. xxvii. 19, cf. Assyr. guggtlu,
Syr. galgold), or (3) that which is whirled, such as stubble (cf. Chald.
D3, Syr. geld) and any globe-like parts of plants, such as the branches
of the wild artichoke (Dr. Thomson), or the ‘rose of Jericho’
(letters in Guardian, March 1884), both which have struck travellers
as natural emblems of impotency, when chased by the wind. The
third sense applies here and in Ps. Ixxxiii. 14. For the Chaldee
usage, cf. Targ. Ex. v. 12, and for the Assyrian cognate, Haupt in
KK. A. T., p. 500.

xvi. 1. For 9yby comp. Arabic sazsaru, the ‘creaking’ insect
(Lane), also found in Assyrian (‘the cricket,’ Friedr. Delitzsch,
Assyrische Studien, i. 26). It is noteworthy, however, that both here
and in Job xl. 31 the Sept. rendering of 5ySy is wAofov. On the
whole phrase, see JVo/es and Criticisms, p. 20 (where, on 1. 23, for
‘day’ read ‘year’, and Stade, De Lsate Vaticiniis Aethiopicis, who
comes to the same conclusion.

xvi. 2, Read with Stade p1p. The Metheg of the received
text no doubt indicates that they understood the word (or words)
somewhat as M‘Gill or Delitzsch, against whom see commentary.
pip might be an adjective (like syry), but is more probably a sub-
stantive meaning ‘great strength’ , comp. Arab. kuzwat, 1 ‘robur,’ 2
‘pars queedam funis.’

xvi. 7. Read py (comp. parallel clause), with Sept., Targ.,
Vulg., Lowth, Knobel, Stade. Ges. renders as I have done, but
thinks the second » is retroactive. This, however, is not proved by
Job xxxiii. 17, where a 9 has dropped out of the text (see Dillmann,
ad loc.). Ewald reads Dy oy. I observe that Del., in his 3rd ed.,
thinks the text-reading is established by ‘parallels like Zeph. iii.
to. But “ny, there, should be taken in the sense of ‘ sweet
odours’ (comp. Ezek. viii. 11), parallel to »mmop ; for the form of the
sentence, comp. on Iii. 12.

XIX. 7. WN B-Sy. Del. (on Prov. viii. 29) denies that mp ever
means the shore, whether of the sea, or of a river, and in the third
edition of his Jesaa renders the above words ‘at the mouth (AZiindung)
of the Nile,’ i.e. where the stream approaches the sea. But the
ordinary view seems more appropriate. Dr. Weir has ‘ “by the
brink of the river,” ie. where the last vestige of green might be sure
to be found.’

xx. to. In the second half of this verse there are two difficulties.

152 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES,

I. DN everywhere else, even Jer. li. 32, like Assyr. agammu, means
‘pond,’ ‘marsh’ (see especially Ex. vii. 19, viii. 1, where it is used
in this sense in connection with the Nile) ; nox or pay ‘to be sad’ is
a post-Biblical word (=Assyr. agdmz). 2. a2w ‘wy is an unnatural
way of expressing ‘hired workmen’; the usual term is p-yaw, after
‘wy we should have expected nondp, (Dr. Weir). The 12% read by
Sept., Pesh. (£060s, shakrdé) is plausible (Dr. Weir compares xxiv. 9) ;
these versions suppose an allusion to the barley-wine of Egypt
(Herod. ii. 77). But this hardly suits the context. Lastly, there is
the view of Targ., Saad., Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Gritz (AZonatsschrift, 1877,
p- 376), that 49y meant ‘dams,’ comp. 3p ‘to stop up,’ Arab. sakara
‘to dam up ariver.’ This harmonises admirably with the preceding
verses, but not so well with the first half of this verse.

XIx. 18. pann ay. So most MSS. and editions, the Massora
(see however Geiger, Urschrift, p. 79), and the Peshito. The other
reading ponn 1p is supported by 15 MSS. in the text and one
in the margin (Kennicott and de Rossi) ; also by Symmachus, the
Vulgate, Saadya, the Talmud (‘ AZenachoth, 110 a’), Rashi, Vitr., Ges.
(Thesaurus, but not Commentary), Hitz., Naeg. Aquila and Theodo-
tion have "Apes, which leaves the reading doubtful. Sept. has wdéAus
acoedék, i.e. payn wy (cf. i. 26), which Geiger boldly maintains to be
the true reading, pin (deliberately altered, he thinks, into pn by the
Egyptian Jews) being a disparaging corruption of this. To me the
Sept. reading looks more like a retort upon the Palestinian Jews for
expounding pram y in a manner uncomplimentary to Onias. Very
possibly the Book of Isaiah was translated into Greek at Leontopolis.

xx. 1. f1790. On the transliteration of this Assyrian name see
below on xxil. 15. The meaning is explained by Sargon himself in
the cylinder inscription (line 50), ‘the gods gave him this name that
he might keep justice and righteousness,’ implying that Sargon him-
self is the ‘ faithful king.’

XXI. 11, 12. On Griatz’s hypothesis (Geschichte der Juden, ii. 1,
p. 485) the passage runs thus :—

The fugitives (449m) call unto me from Seir ;
‘Watchman, what of the night?
Watchman, what of the night of distress?’
The watchman saith,
‘The morning cometh, the night fleeth (‘55 po):
O that ye would ask! Ask ye;
Return, come.’
XXII. 3. nvpp ‘without the bows being strung’ either on their
side or the enemy’s.
xxi. 5. yyw. The word stands so close to Elam, that it seems
inevitable to take it as the name of the tribe referred to in the com-

mentary. Added to this, the other yyw means, not ‘a cry of despair’

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 153

(which the ordinary rendering presupposes), but ‘a cry for help.’
The remark is Luzzatto’s.

xxu. 14. For the construction ‘5 qps, Riehm (Der Begriff der
Siihne im A. T., p. 9) well compares Ezek. xvi. 63.

XXII. 15. }2D. Saku in Assyrian means ‘a high officer,’ from
sakin ‘to set up, place’ (comp. i231 ‘store-cities’) ; saknu and 2D
alike descend from the period of ‘undivided’ Semitic speech. As a
rule, no doubt, organic s in Assyrian remains so in the corresponding
word in Hebrew; but there are exceptions, e.g., dzslu =bop, ssid
=p. At a later time, the Babylonian form of this word (sagz)
became the Hebrew s’agan (see comm. on xli. 25). In this case, the
sibilant is just what we should expect, since Assyrian proper names,
when transferred into Hebrew, usually change their sibilants, e.g.,
Sarrukin becomes 1190, and S'amirina }i79¥. Obviously, the Jews
were not conscious that they already had the same word under the
form }2D. M. Ganneau has found the title ‘the yop of Qarthadachat’
applied to a person dedicating a vase to Baal-Lebanon in a Phcenician
inscription (Atheneum, Apr. 17, 1880, pp. 502-4).

xxi. 7. ansy ood netn. Del. (see commentary) regards ’y as
the vocative, remarking that ‘the omission of the article is not sur-
prising (xxii. 2, Ewald § 327 a), whereas, on the other view, though
possible (see xxxii. 13), it is still harsh (comp. xiv. 16).’ The phrase
is harshly constructed, on any view of it ; but npby as epexegetical
of nad seems to me peculiarly harsh, and considering that a plurality
of persons (viz. the Phoenicians in general) has been addressed just
before (v. 6), it is rather unlikely that a fresh company (viz. the
Tyrians) should be referred to now.

XXII. Ir. my. Is this an intentional Phcoenicism parallel to
the Moabitism in the prophecy on Moab (see above on xv. 1)? At
any rate, there is an affinity with Phoenician in the suffix with ) (comp.
on liii. 8). See Euting, Sechs phiniz. Inschriften aus Idalion, p. 15
(also referred to by Del. in his 3rd ed.).

XXII. 13. aw. The Hebrew represents the Babylonian form
Kasdti, the Greek Xad6éaio, the Assyrian Kaldf. A sibilant gener-
ally, though not necessarily, becomes / before a dental in Assyrian,
e.g., khamistu and khamiltu ‘ five,’ lubustu and lubultu ‘ clothing.’

——— Saadya’s version deserves recording. ‘Console thyself
(by reflecting) that against this very country of the Chaldeans there
hath come the people to whom it did not belong—the Assyrians, and
that they have made it into deserts.’ In Z C. A. I adopted Ewald’s
n’sv7> pox, to which Kuenen objects, 1. that usage requires *3y937 poss
and 2. that it is natural to expect a reference to a fresh people
rather than to the Phcenicians, who have been addressed all along

154 CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES.

(Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1871, pp. 74, 75). The first objection is not
very important ; the phrase quoted by Dr. Kuenen only occurs in
catalogues of nations. We can as well say nyy23 pas as p»nwSp pos.
The second is really strong. (Comp. a long discussion of the pas-
sage in my Wotes and Criticisms.)

XXIV. 15. ova. ‘May it not be 1732! p83, somewhat as xxv.
3? Comp. Esth. x. 1, the only other passage, except xi. 11, in which
pn sis found.’ Dr. Weir.

XXIV. 19. ‘For ny5 read y4, inf. abs. with 4 being without ex-
ample, and the 7 being taken from next word: so read poy (i re-
peated from last word).’ Dr. Weir after Maurer, Hitzig, Knobel.

XXIV. 22. Dr. Weir reads YDNN ADN ; comp. SeDnin FON xxxiii. 4.

xxvi. 4. Ges. suggests that myn» may be a gloss on the uncom-
mon 7); so too Knobel. But though Aquila already has & 76 xvpiw
kvptos, it is possible that the text is imperfect.

xxvil. 6. Has not nym fallen out (comp. Eccles. ii. 16)? There
is a similar doubt in Ixvi. 18.

XXVIIL. 11. s3y5. See Hupfeld or Perowne on Ps. xxxv. 16.

xxvil. 16. The construction ‘I am he that have founded’ is
most unnatural; read 1p}, (I am glad to find myself supported by
Dr. Weir, who also suggests 1%, and by Stade, Hebr. Grammatik,
§ 2144.) Di. is not a genuine parallel. There is no occasion to take
it as 3s. m. imperf. Hif. ; it can equally well be partic. Kal (comp.
Arab. gatil).

Read w!; I forget to whom the suggestion is due.
The Hifil is used absolutely, as Nah. iii. 1. The letters 9 and n are
easily confounded in the square character. The Sept. translator
either reads v3, or (since Targ. has an equivalent rend.) falls into
paraphrase. Pesh. follows Sept., Targ.

xxv. 18. 183), This is the only passage in which the Pual of
sp> is used in the sense of ‘cancelling,’ and py is feminine. The
conjecture BN) is confirmed by Jer. xxxiii. 21. I find that Dr. Weir
accepted it.

xxv. 25. The difficult words myyw and yoD) are simply mis-
written for mnyw and myp2. The scribe did not like to spoil his ma-
nuscript by excising the faulty letters (asin xvii. 1, xliii. 12, see notes):
Wellhausen, Geschichte Israels, i. 409 (the conjecture had already
been made, so far as pw is concerned). Sept. gives a duplicate
rend. of npp>}.

XXVIII 29. mwin---xdpn. Comp. Job xi. 6, where read with
Dr. Robertson Smith and (partly) Merx, qwind owdp o9. Another
sign of the gnomic affinities of this paragraph.

XxIx. 1. Sym. Del. and Hitzig (/esaia, but not Gesch. d. V.

CRITICAL AND PIIILOILOGICAL NOTES. 155

Jsrael) explain, ‘God’s-hearth ;’ comp. Ezek. xliii. 15, 16. But this
meaning is very dubious, even in Ezekiel (see Motes and Criticisms,
Pp- 31, 32, and comp. Smend on Ezek. 2. c.), whereas that adopted
has the support of usage, requires no comparison of Arabic, and
suits the context.

XXIX. 9. Read inmn. See the parallel passage Hab. 1. 5, and
comp. for the form of the phrase Zeph. ii. 1 (where read 1wi3) weiany
for the unintelligible ‘pn7).

XXIX. 10. p'xiATNN seems to be a gloss inserted from a mis-
understanding of nnn, as Mr. G. W. Collins, of Keble College,
suggests.

XXIX. 22. OOIANNN 1p Wer. Wellhausen regards these words as
a gloss based on the late legend of the deliverance of Abraham from
the furnace of the Chaldeans (Geschichte Israels, i. 373, note). But
is not the expression too forcible for a mere gloss, and may not
Abraham’s deliverance from his idolatrous kinsmen (see my note,
vol. i., p. 174) be typical of the deliverance of the faithful Israel from
the tyrant, the scorner, and the unrighteous (xxix. 20)? I admit,
however, that the clause comes in very unexpectedly ; it does not
fall in quite naturally with the context ; and if we approach the pas-
sage with the presuppositions (¢) that Abraham is a legendary or
mythical personage, and (J) that this personage only attained im-
portance at a late period of Hebrew literature compared with Isaac
(‘Abraham first appears in Isa. xl.-Ixvi.’ [xli. 8, li. 2], says Well-
hausen), it becomes natural to excise the words, as this talented
though hypercritical scholar has proposed. My objection to admit-
ting his view is not that he supposes a gloss to have intruded into the
received text. Considering the large number of glosses which in-
truded into the Hebrew text reproduced by the Sept., it would be no
wonder if, with all the care bestowed by the Palestinian Jewish
critics, a fair number of glosses should have lingered in the Mas-
soretic text. It is rather this: that in the present position of inquiry
a commentator on the prophets, whether of orthodox or rationalistic
leanings, cannot allow himself to take the mythical theory of the
early Jewish narratives into account. I have thought it, however,
only fair to warn the student of the rocks which may be hidden even
in a passage so simple grammatically as the present. No book of
the Bible can be fully understood by itself ; a future commentator on
Isaiah will be able to assume positive critical results which are yet far
from having been attained.

XXX. 12. pyya. Read, with Gratz, wpya, and so also Ps. Ixii.
11. Comp. Prov. ii. 15, iv. 24.

xxx. 18. oy. This, the text-reading, does not give a suitable
sense. p45 with a gerund following can only mean ‘to arise for

156 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

action’ (so Ges. in Zhesaurus); we have no right to import the
meaning of ‘desire’ from the Arabic. Rashi indeed explains by
pnon’, and similarly Delitzsch (‘God will withdraw Himself from
Israel’s history to His royal and judicial throne in heaven’). But
how forced a view, and how opposed to the context! Yet the view
of Ges., though supported by the usage of the Psalms (see Ps. xviii.
47, xxi. 14, &c.), does not suit the parallelism. non means ‘ to ex-
pect with longing’ (as may also be urged against Del.’s rendering) ;
or ought, it would seem, to have a similar meaning. It is best there-
fore to adopt the reading of two MSS. py, not in the artificial sense
‘stirreth not’ given to it by Ewald, ‘but in that which it undoubtedly
bears in Ps. xxxvii. 7’! (where note the parallelism). The difficulty
of the passage partly arises from the fusion of two distinct prophecies
(see Commentary).

Xxx. 32. Read 03, with Q’ri, Targ., Vulg., and many MSS,, in-
cluding the Babylonian Codex ;? so Naegelsbach. Chap. xxiii. 13
must not be quoted in favour of 73, for there both land and people
of Chaldzea are referred to—here only the Assyrian army.

XXX. 33. mnpn. From nap, 1. an object spat upon; 2. the
‘abominable’ place where children were sacrificed to Baal as Moloch,
comes AMDN (as NWS from vx). The word is masculine ; and the
feminine suffixes at the end of the verse are to be referred (as Del.
points out) to the pa, or ‘high place’ on which any sacrifice had to
be offered. The Jewish derivation from 4A ‘a drum,’ has only an
imaginative, ‘ Haggadic’ value ; though in Egypt, as well as, accord-
ing to the legend, in Palestine, the tambourine was possibly asso-
ciated with Baal-worship. (So Mr. Tomkins, referring to Revue
Leyyptienne, i. 43.)

xxx. 8. Sept., Vulg., and the Babylonian Codex read xd for b;
comp. xxii. 3 (see above).

xxxir. 1. Read ow. The scribe began to write pays, which
the parallel line led him to expect here. A similar error in Ps. lxxiv.
14 (end).

XXXL. 1. Read smbo5 5 the argument of Ges. (in Zhesaurus,
s. v. m$3) is conclusive. and 3 confounded, as Ex. xvii. 16, Josh.
viii. 13 (comp. v. 9 1b). So, too, Cappel, Lowth, Ewald, Krochmal.

XXXII. 11. Notice the rhyme. Assonance and even rhyme are
more frequently and deliberately employed in Hebrew poetry than
is observed at first sight.—‘The last clause,’ remarks Dr. Weir, ‘ is
difficult. ‘The present reading seems to have been that of the copy

1 Notes and Criticisns on the Hebrew Text of Isaiah (Macmillan, 1868), pp. 32, 33-

2 By this title I designate a Codex of the prophets (i.e. the so-called later prophets),
with the Bibylonian punctuation, dated A.D. 916-17, and now preserved at St. Peters-
burg. It was edited for the Russian Government in a superb photo-lithographic fac-
simile by Dr, Hermann Strack in 1876,

CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES. 157

from which Sept. was translated ; so of the other old versions, except
Pesh., which puts 2 before pany, and joins it to the preceding clause
(as Sept. also does), and the Targ. which gives, “My word shall
destroy you as the whirlwind chaff.” A conjectural reading is p> ‘n17
for pdnin, which seems borne out by other passages of Isaiah, as
iv. 4, xi. 4, and especially xxx. 27, 28.’ The conjecture is that of
Secker and Lowth.

xxxiu. 14 4, Dr. Weir proposes to render, ‘ Who will abide for
us the devouring fire?’ i.e., on our behalf, for the salvation of the
people.

XXXIIL 23. DIN }D yrne-b3. A hard passage. The subject of
the verb is clearly the ropes which have just been mentioned (not
the sailors, as A. E., Kimchi, Drechsler) ; hence ‘ their mast,’ i-e., the
mast which it is their function (according to the ancient Greek and
doubtless also the Phcenicio-Hebrew system) to bind to the iororédy
(a piece of wood set in the keel). Now arises a difficulty with 2.
To render, with most since Cocceius, ‘the stand’ (i.e., the ioroz.)
seems to contradict these primitive naval arrangements ; so that I
have preferred, with Luzzatto, the Jewish commentator, and Naegels-
bach, to recur to the original sense of ‘firm,’ or rather ‘upright.’ It
is true (as remarked in the review of vol. i. in the Dud/iz) that 13 does
not occur as an adjective elsewhere in the sense of physical, but only
in that of moral uprightness, but there is no reason whatever why the
physical sense (guaranteed by the use of }3 the substantive for
‘ pedestal’) should not occur—comp. pJ¥ (1) straightness, (2)
righteousness. On the whole passage, comp. the beautiful ode of
Horace: ‘O navis, referent’ (i. 14).

xxxIv. 12. I formerly read pw y's1 yp! mobpn in with Dr.
Weir; comp. xli. 12,1. 2. Bickell is partly supported by Sept.

XXXV. 1. Sap oww. The final } of the verb is assimilated to
the following ); comp. pip, Num. iii. 49 (Ibn Ezra). Apparent
orthographical errors may now and then indicate phonetic laws. So
Ezek. xxxiii. 26, ‘n ynwy (7 before ¢ becomes 7).

-_-—— nbyan. Friedr. Del. rejects the usual renderings of
this word, partly because they imply that it is connected with >y3
‘onion,’ partly because of his discovery of the Assyrian cognate of
‘n in the bilingual tablets.!| There can be no doubt that the Assyr.
khabagillatu is identical by origin with the Hebrew ’habagcalt (so the
early form may have been), and the Accadian word of which the
former is the equivalent is ideographically written ‘reed seed-making’
(Sayce), and explained by the Assyr. Zubsu sa kané ‘ clothing (or gar-
ment) of the reed (or reeds)’ (W. A. .,v. 32, lines 60-63). What this

1 The Hebrew Language viewed in the Light of Assyrian Research, p. 34.

158 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

phrase means is not obvious. It may refer to the ‘husk of the reed’
(Friedr. Del.), or to the uses to which this plant was applied (Hough-
ton). But I hesitate to conclude that by £Aavaggalt the Hebrew poets
meant either ‘the reed’ in general (so Friedr. Del.), or the kind of
reed (cyperus syriacus) found in Sharon and elsewhere at present.
Identical names of plants and animals in cognate languages do not
always designate the same species (take DN] and the Arab. rim for
instances).—The objection to the current renderings based on the
doubtfulness of a preformative n is plausible, but not decisive. The
plant intended by 2habagcalt may have only an apparent connection
with dag?, and yet it may be of the bulbous class. Tristram and Conder
were both struck by the beautiful white narcissus of the Plain of
Sharon, and graceful as both the cyperus papyrus and the cyperus syriacus
may be, they can hardly compete in poetic appropriateness with the
narcissus. (Nor do they flower at the right time to satisfy Cant. ii. 1,
II, 12, viz. the spring.) ‘If we ask how does a word in Assyrian
similar to the Hebrew ‘nm come to denote a reed, I think we can with-
out any stretch of the imagination give a reason. The Accadian
name of “ reed-making seed ” will apply to the large tufts of heads at
the extremity of which the flowers and seeds appear in both the
above-named species.’ (Mr. Houghton, M.S. communication.)

xxxv. 8. The first 774 has obviously got its 1 from the second.
As to yb sim, no one doubts that it caz be construed; and ingenuity
can always devise a point of connection with the context. Mr. Words-
worth suggests that ‘for them’ may refer to the blind, deaf, and
lame of vv. 5, 6 (Bampton Lectures, 1881). If some one of the current
renderings must be chosen, that of Ewald seems preferable, but the
words may perhaps be a duplicate corrupt reading of the opening
words of the verse.

xXxxv. 10. Read as in lv. 11, and see Driver, Hebrew Tenses,
§ 14 y note}.

XXXVIL 16. pan aw. It is debated whether this should be
rendered ‘who sitteth between,’ or, ‘upon the cherubim.’ It is best
to adhere to the undeniable usage, and render ‘who inhabiteth the
cherubim.’ So Ewald, though he does not mean anything sub-
stantially different from the alternative rendering (see his Comment-
ary on Ps. xxii. 4). Riehm, however (rendering, like Ewald, ‘in-
habitest’), thinks the Hebrew phrase meant that Jehovah in the
temple was altogether inclosed by the cherubs and their wings. See
also Kosters, Zheologisch Tidschrift, 1879, p. 468.

XXXviI. 28. Are we to read pty or (with 2 Kings) mpsw? The
latter would bea unique form for iD3¥? (‘ blasting ’i.e., ‘ blasted corn’);
the former (in the plural) is well known. The saying ‘ preestat lectio

CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES. 159

ardua’ is not axiomatic in the O. T. ; so that pp ty is preferable. It
means a field with the corn that grows upon it (see Hab. iii. 17, and
comp. MY Ex. xxii. 4). The Isaiah Septuagint however renders as
if a special kind of grass were meant—éypworrs (the cyuodon dactylon,
anglicised as creeping dog’s tooth grass, universally found in the
south of Europe, and the grass of the streets in north Italy. (Well-
hausen’s conjecture that yp nb is a corruption of 42 “Bd, Bleek’s
Linleitung, 4th ed., p. 257, is plausible, but scarcely necessary.)

xxxvil. 8. Read wpwn, for the sake of simplicity and ‘ concord.’

XXXVI. 12. yq ‘my dwelling.” Kimchi well compares Ps.
Ixxxiv. 11, where the verb 15 occurs in this sense. Still I doubt if
it be a part of the proper Hebrew vocabulary ; in the Targums it is
the constant rendering of 3. The Assyrian div means rather
‘castle.’

Read AHP with First; the Chaldaising sense suits
best.

XXXVI. 14. mpyiy. Pointing pty, Klostermann takes this for
another form of pppy from Chald. ppy to occupy oneself, or (Ithpaal)
to strive together. Comp. pyy Gen. xxvi. 20, pivy a v. 1. of Prov.
xxviii. 17, and for the unusual preposition which follows Targ. 2
Kings iv. 13.

XXxvIL. 16. ‘ay ym omby. Gritz (Geschichte, ii. 1, p. 478)
conjectures this to be a prayer of the king that his life might be
spared for his people’s sake. Comp. Lam. iv. 20, ‘The breath of
our nostrils, the anointed of Jehovah.’ The sense would then be,
*O Lord! [mayest thou recover me] for their sakes, that they may
live ; indeed, for every one of them is the breath of my life.’

XXxXIx, 1. yaw. Read yow %D (after 2 Kings xx. 12). So Sept.,
Pesh. For instances of the confusion of 1 and 3 see Driver,
Hebrew Tenses, § 75 a, note.

XL. 4. ppa>. There is no doubt that rzksz (same sibilant) in
Assyr. means a rope or bond, so that, using this analogy, ‘1 should
mean ‘bonds.’ This agrees with the meaning of the Hebrew verb.
But in this connection? Yes, comp. Assyr. dir#z7 ‘hills’ from daré ‘ to
bind’ (Friedr. Del., Zhe Heb. Language &c., p. 23, note). So jugum
from jungere.

XL. 11. Spy. Friedr. Del. (Zhe Hebrew Language &c., pp. 5, 6)
produces a new meaning for $n) from the Babylonian bilingual texts,
where za’dlu, nakhu, and rabdgu are the equivalents of the same
ideograph. He would render ‘cause to rest,’ ‘satisfy,’ ‘place in
safety,’ according to the context, the root-meaning being ‘to rest, or
lie down.’ This suits Gen. xlvii. 17, 2 Chr. xxxii. 22, Ps. xxiii. 2, but
a careful examination of the twelve passages in which the word

160 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

occurs may Icad the reader to doubt whether the verb has quite
the same sense in Hebrew as in Assyrian. In the three pas-
sages of Isaiah (xl. 11, xlix. ro, li. 18) the context or the
parallelism is against the new meaning proposed. The notion of
‘leading’ seems, whether by accretion, or by nature, to be now
inherent in the Hebrew verb. Besides, two of the three places re-
ferred to above are doubtful. In 2 Chr. xxxii. 22 a corruption of the
text has long ago been surmised (see Q. P. Z.), and in Ps. xxiii. 2 a
slight difference of meaning between the two verbs heightens the
effect. Del. also quotes Ex. xv. 13, but the preposition by is adverse
to his view.

XL. 21. nyt. We may either supply the prep. from ww,
comp. xlviii. 9 (see however Commentary), or read ‘od, and suppose
that the first 1 dropped out, owing to the 9 preceding and the » fol-
lowing. Vitr. thinks that the Massoretes accented off yINA Aww
to show that it was the common object of all the three verbs. More
probably they assumed an ellipsis of .

XL. 24. a yx. The phrase only occurs here. But we find ]*$ 9s
repeated three times in xli. 26, and §\N repeated without a negative in
xli. 10, xliv. 15, xlvi. 11 ; for the repetition of b3 comp. XXxlil. 20.
There is, therefore, no occasion for Dr. Weir’s conjecture san IN:
wot -»- 9), Sept., Pesh., wwar--- ayy. ‘A good deal
may be said in favour of this reading. (1) yy) is not found else-
where in Nifal, nor yy in Piel or Pual. (2) The meaning is good
(comp. xvii. ro, 11). “Before they have planted or sown, i.e., pro-
pagated themselves in any way; nay, before they have themselves
taken root.” yt may be used of the plant, Gen. i. 29, and perhaps
yo) may also of the v¥3, for ‘to shoot forth fresh plants.”’ Dr. Weir.

XL. 31. 7x sy. My own rend. is that of Sept., Targ., Pesh.,
Vulg., Saad., Bochart, Lo., Ew., Naeg. It seems to be required by
the parallelism with m$nn (for which word Dr. Pusey compares Arab.
akhlafa, ‘to put forth fresh feathers after moulting’). Hitz. indeed
objects (1) that though nby =‘ to grow up’ inv. 6, there is no in-
stance of such a sense of nym, and (2) that instead of 429, we should,
on the view opposed to his own, expect my. But as to (1), the
observation, though adopted by Del., seems incorrect ; for in Ezek.
xxxvii. 6, nbyn is used of bringing flesh upon the bones. And with
regard to (2), let me simply ask, Why? Are not the pinion-feathers
renewed ?—As to the form 38, it is, strictly speaking, a xomen
unitatis (see Ewald, Gramm. arab., § 295, Lehrbuch der hebr. Sprache,
§ 1764), but the distinction is ndt always present to the Hebrew
writers.

XL. 8. 939". Dr. Weir, while admitting that the pronominal

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 161

suffix of 3n& elsewhere always denotes the object (‘my lover’=‘he
who loveth, or loved, me’) thinks that in this passage it marks the
subject, and renders ‘whom I have loved’ (comp. Deut. iv. 37).
Comp. Vitringa.

XLI.-10. ynypx. For the sense adopted, comp. Ruth i. 18
(partic. Hithp.=‘steadfastly purposing’), and especially Ps. lxxx. 16,
18 (Piel used precisely as here) ; also (with Naeg.) Matt. xii. 18, where
the qone of Isa. xlii. 1 is rendered qpérioa.

XLI. 18. ‘py is not quite synonymous with ppy) n (xiii. 2). It
means those slight elevations which are drier than the surrounding
land, though in Palestine at least they yield pasture (Jer. xiv. 6).
The Syriac sh’/ayd denotes simply ‘a plain ;’ shafyd is the equivalent
of sw in Pesh. Isa. xl. 4, and (virtually) of pypa in the Harclean
Syriac of Luke iii. 5. De Dieu would have ‘pw, too, rendered
everywhere ‘plain,’ though Pesh. nowhere, I think, gives si’/ayé as
the equivalent of ‘ay, but most commonly shadild, ‘a way.’

XLI 25. Read D2.

XLI. 27. It is a pleasure to transcribe Louis de Dieu’s acute note
in his Animadversions (1648) :—

‘Interpretes duas hic faciunt enunciationes, quarum primam
duris satis ellipsibus supplent. Mihi videtur hic mera esse vocum
transpositio, in hac lingua miré elegans, sed aliis linguis inimitabilis.
Sic explico, Primus ego dabo Sioni et Hierosolymis late annunciantem
ecce ecce lla. Provocaverat omnes Gentium deos, ut que futura sunt
praedicerent ; quumque eos nihil tale posse gloriatus esset, Ego,
inquit, et ego primus dabo Sioni et Hierosolymis qui latum nuncium
afferentes dicant, Ecce ecce illa, presto sunt que Deus preedixit.’
De Dieu, however, had no idea of Hebrew parallelism, which seems
to me to require us to render pwr ‘a precursor’ (or, in Wiclif’s
language, ‘a prior’), like yyim~ ‘a successor,’ in Job xix. 25. Perhaps
we may say that the former receives a fuller meaning from the
parallel word -wa, as the latter is coloured or defined by the
corresponding word %by3 (as if ‘the future defender of my right’).

XLU. 2. nw Reifmann’s conjecture Nv (Del., Jesaza, p. 440)
is very plausible ; it brings out with much force the contrast between
the old and the new dispensation ; comp. Am. i. 2, iii. 8. Still, yw
without $yp occurs again in v. 11 (comp. iii. 7).

XL. 4. yy. The pronunciation of common life for yf}, as in
neo-Punic and west Aramaic. Buhl, comparing Stade, Lehrbuch
a. h. Spr. § 95, Noldeke, Kuragef. syr. Gr., § 48.

XLIL 6. pins). The presence of the jussive is a great difficulty.
I cannot bring myself, with my friend Dr. Driver, to render ‘ that
I may take hold’ (Hebrew Tenses, § 176 Obs.), and would rather

VOL, II. M

162 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES,

suppose a laxity of pronunciation, which has found expression here
and there in the punctuation. What the sense requires seems to me
clearly ‘). :

XLU. 6. pg. Taking ‘appointment,’ ‘decision,’ for the pri-
mary sense, we require a root meaning ‘to decide.’ There is in
Assyrian a verb dart, ‘to decide. See passage quoted by Friedr.
Del., who agrees on the sense of na, Zhe Hebrew Language, &c.,
P. 49-

XLII. 15. pK. This passage is strongly against the view that px
can mean ‘islands.’ The sense required and established by etymo-
logy (it is cognate with Arab. awd’, ‘he sojourned’) is ‘habitable
land.’ Hence elsewhere ‘ countries’ (see Commentary on xl. 15).

XLU. 21. Note the construction, which, though thoroughly Hebrew
(Job xxxii. 22, Lam. iv. 14, Ewald), reminds us still more of Arabic.

XLIL 25. mon. The adverbial accusative is doubtless used for
the sake of the assonance with apnby (Del.).

XLII. g. \yap2. Of the three ways of understanding this word—
(1) as an ordinary perfect, (2) as a precative perfect, and (3) as an
imperative—the second and third are alone suitable to the context.
A precative perfect, however, seems too much of an Arabism to be
easily admitted, especially as the evidence for it in Hebrew is not by
any means strong (see Driver, Hebrew Tenses, § 20). There is no
choice, therefore, but to accept the form as an imperative. One can
hardly suppose a corruption of the text (as Lowth), for the same
form occurs in a similar context in Joel iv. 11 ; comp. 9459 Jer. 1. 5.

XLUI. 12. *mypwim. The view proposed in my commentary is
supported by the parallel of xxviil. 25 (see above).

XL. 22. On the force of »5 here, see Ewald, Lehrb. der hebr.
Sprache, § 354 6 (=Hebrew Syntax, by Kennedy, p. 269).

XLiv. 5. Read 11'2 3N3’, with Klostermann. A repeated letter
here, as so often, was dropped. ‘2 33 ‘to write upon,’ as Neh. vii. 5,
viii. 14, xiii. 1. ‘Write with his hand’ is surely a very harsh expres-
sion, though I see it has the authority of Dr. Kay.

XLIV. 12. ‘ Unstreitig ist ein Wort ausgefallen’ (Del.). Read, as
the first word of the verse, with Sept., Pesh., either 13n (Del.), or 10
(comp. Prov. xxvii. 17), which would easily fall out, owing to the pre-
ceding 4m’. Prof. Driver (Hebrew Tenses, § 123 ), prefers 103 (jus-
sive form) or 7M; but the analogy of v. 13 favours the perfect.

XLIv. 14. napd. Read n73). 4 or sand 5 might possibly be con-
founded in the square character ; but more probably the first > is pro-
duced by the vicinity of another word beginning with $ (comp. Ps.
Ixxiv. 14). This is infinitely easier than to suppose an isclated
example of an imperfect in 4 (on which see Driver, Hebrew Tenses,

CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES. 163

§ 204, Obs. 1), and more so even than to assume a ‘periphrastic
future,’ the instances of which given by Del. on Hab. i. 11 may
perhaps require sifting. The three other supposed instances in
Isaiah all seem to me very doubtful. In xxi. r the construction is
rather gerundial ; in xxxvii. 26 the phrase is b mn, ‘to serve for’;
and in xxxviii. 20, though there is no mq expressed, the 5 is still that
of tendency (see translation).

XLIV. 15. 395. It is not very natural in this individualising de-
scription (contrast xlii. 17, where it is a class of persons who say DAN
to 3019) to regard this as a collective. The suffix is amply de-
fensible as a singular (see on lili. 8). Sept., however (not Pesh.),
takes it as a plural.

XLIV. 23. pax ninnn. This and similar phrases always have an
at least implied reference to Shedl. It is Shedl, as the context shows,
which is called mynnn pox in Ezek. xxxi. 14, 16, 18, nysnnn yN in
Ezek, xxvi. 20, xxxii. 18, 245 nynnn a in Ps. lxxxviii. 7, Lam. iii.
5s, and, more explicitly still, qnnn Sixw in Ps. Ixxxvi. 13 (comp.
nnn dw, Isa. xiv. 9). In Ps. cxxxix. 15 the context is obscure,
but even there we have no right, I think, to depart from the universal
meaning of the phrase elsewhere. Possibly, as Hupfeld suggests,
Shed] is there used as an image of an utterly dark, mysterious place.

xLiv, 28. Dr. Kuenen proposes (Hibbert Lectures, 1882, p. 132)
to pronounce, not 70% ‘my shepherd,’ but 7é% ‘my companion,’
comparing Zech. xiii. 7, where, as he truly says, this correction is
required to match the parallel line (‘the man who is my neighbour’).
The mistake would be a natural one ; in Jer. iii. 1, Sept. and Pesh.
misread vo‘zm instead of vétm, But the received pronunciation
gives a good sense here (‘my shepherd’=‘the shepherd appointed
by me,’ comp. ‘his king,’ Ps. xviii. 50, Heb. 51), and produces a
parallelism with ‘his anointed’ in the next verse. If, however, we
accept the correction, it is the highest title which Cyrus has received
from the prophet.

XLV. 11. ‘Or should we not read ysywn?’ (Pencil note of Dr,
Weir’s). See Commentary.

XLV. 24. Wow *>. Read 298! with Luzzatto. The $ probably arose
out of the mark put by the scribe to separate the name of God
from the following word. Comp. the use of P’siq in the Massoretic
text of Ex. xvii. 15, Jer. xxiii. 6, xxiii. 16, Fora parallel to such
an interruption of the speech, see lvii. 19.

XLVI. 4. ‘nowy. Klostermann would read spony (Zedtschr. f. luther
Theologie, 1876, p. 18). But the received text gives a finer meaning:
‘T have made,’ or begotten ; paternal love impels me to ‘carry.’

xiv. 8. Read ywwann (s and 3 may be confounded in several

M2

164 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

older forms of the characters). Comp. above on xxix. 9. The
commentaries cite the Vulgate as reading ‘confundamini’ ; but the
Codex Amiatinus has ‘fundamini’ (Heyse), and this is the rendering
of St. Jerome in his Commentary (‘imd fundamini, ne rursum subitus
idolatris vos turbo subvertat’). In any case, ‘fundamini,’ and not
‘fundemini,’ seems to be established.

XLV. 7. WY ‘for ever.’ See Commentary, and compare the form
of v. 6. Hitzig goes so far as to deny that 1y ever means ‘ usque’ or
‘adeo ut,’ and certainly the passages generally quoted require revi-
sion. In 1 Sam. ii. 5, 1y may very well=‘for ever,’ as here ; in
1 Sam. xx. 41, it probably has the prepositional meaning ‘ unto’ (see
Sept.) ; in Job viii. 21, Ewald, Dillmann, Merx, and Hitzig point 1y,
and the connection seems to require this; in Job xiv. 6, ‘until’
yields a perfectly satisfactory sense. In Josh. xvii. 14 (where what
Ges. calls the fuller form ws» sy stands at present) we should pro-
bably rather read sw 5y—notice that a second 1p follows ; and
Gritz proposes to read Sy ‘because’ in our passage (Monatsschrift,
1881, p. 228).

XLVI. 11. 7INW. Not ‘its dawn’ (Dr. Weir remarks that In¥ occurs
nowhere else with a suffix), but ‘to charm away.’ How does the
word obtain this meaning? Through the root-meaning of ‘ dark-
ness.’ anv is properly ‘to be dark’ (whence nw ‘the morning-
grey’). To ‘charm’ is to bring something about by dark, mysterious
means (see Wiinsche on Hos. vi. 3) ; comp. our own phrase ‘the
black art.’ It is not therefore (as might be supposed by the oft-
repeated reference to the Arabic sa#ava) a sense not thoroughly
native to Hebrew.

XLVII. 14. Read prand with Luzzatto, and so Job xxx. 4.

XLVI. 6. nyyy. Very possibly we should read nyya ‘ardua in-
tellectu,’ as in the parallel passage, Jer. xxxiii. 3. :

XLVI. 14. Read pivaa with Del. (ed. 3, p. 720). In spite of
v. 9, it does not seem very natural to make the preposition in the
preceding line operate prospectively.

XLv1I. 18, 19. Ewald’s view of the construction, alluded to in
the Commentary, is peculiar. He puts ‘O that thou hadst’ down to
‘as the grazus thereof’ into a parenthesis, and continues ‘ his (Israel’s)
name shall not be cut off nor destroyed before me,’ thus making
the last clause a categorical affirmation of Israel’s indestructibility.
Against this see my note. The slight change in the construction is
simply due to the fact that the consequence expressed in n73°-Nb is
still future On my see Driver, Hebrew Tenses, §§ 127 y, 140. His
alternative rendering is one of those subtleties in which able gram-
marians delight. The version of Hitz., Del. (see above, p. 8, note ")

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 165

seems almost to require »4%4 (comp. Deut. xxxii. 29) or m'my (as Mic.
ii. 11), as Del. himself frankly admits; comp. also Ps. Ixxxi. 14-16
(p38).

XLIX. 5. AON NS (Q’ri, 1). The reading of the text is harder than
that of the margin, but is not on that account (comp. ix. 2) to be
preferred. The latter is evidently required by the context. The
division among the ancient interpreters was partly occasioned by
their party prejudices. Thus St. Jerome objects to the rendering of
Sept., because it gives up ‘a very strong testimony against the perfidy
of the Jews.’ He himself renders ‘ et Israel non congregabitur’ (the
exact opposite of Aquila).

XLIX. 7. M2. Most explain this as either an infinitival substan-
tive or an uncommon adjective. But it is more natural (comp. next
phrase) either to point mt2 (Aram. partic. Peil) with Luzzatto, or (as
this would be unique in Hebr.) to read pray (comp. liii. 3) with
Lagarde.

ayn, According to Ew., Hitz., Del., a participial sub-
stantive in Piel = ‘ object of abhorrence’ (Ewald, Lehrbuch, § 160 ¢,
compares fi?) in liii. 3). Ges., however, remarks that the easiest
explanation is to take the Piel as ‘ poetically intransitive’=ayny,
But how much more natural to read aynp with Luzzatto (pointing,
however, aynia)! It really seems as if the authors of the points made
a desperate, though partial, attempt to efface a meaning which was
offensive to the national pride.

xLix. 8. Ewald would insert py yb from Sept., and supports
this by Just. Mart. ¢. Z7yph. c. 122 (but wrongly, for Justin quotes
from chap. xlii.). Against this, see Commentary.

XLIX. 12, 0%. Clericus and Hupfeld (on Ps. cvii. 3) conjecture
1)" for the Psalm-passage, and this seems to be absolutely neces-
sary there, since the West has been already mentioned in the parallel
line! It is, I think, but little less necessary here. It is clear from
the mistakes of Sept. that abbreviations were of frequent occurrence
in the most ancient Hebrew MSS. See the instances in Frankel,
Vorstudien zu der Septuaginta, pp. 214-6 (a notable one is eis Odvarov
=, as if this were abbreviated from nya, lili. 8 ; see also Jer. iii.
19, Judg. xix. 18, and below on li. 6).

XLIX. 17. One of the few occasions on which Saadya deviates from
the Massoretic text, not without the ancient versions. See on liv. 9.

L. 4. niyd. If it is undesirable in any case to appeal solely to
the superabundant Arabic vocabulary, it is specially so in a section so
plain and natural in its phraseology. I incline to agree with Kloster-

1 Auth. Vers., too, boldly renders in Ps. /.c. ‘from the south,’ though perhaps by
a guess; see Poole, Synopsis ad loc.

166 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

mann, that both ny and nytb are only variants for the one true
reading nw. Comp. the use of ny for ‘to teach’ in Prov. x. 21.
Perhaps ‘to edify’ (suggested by Del. on Prov.) would be the best
rendering.

LI. 6. ‘py yo-WpD. ~There are two objections to rendering }3 ‘an
insect:’ 1. that the singular (as Talmudic Hebrew shows) would be 733
(comp. py from myn); 2. that a single gnat would hardly be
referred to in so elevated a passage (contrast 1 Sam. xxiv. 14). The
force of both objections is destroyed by Dr. Weir’s very easy cor-
rection. ‘Is not,’ he asks, ‘the right reading pv), the next word
beginning with 0°?’ It seems natural to make the same emendation
in Num. xiii. 33, ‘We became in our eyes as locusts, and vermin
became we in theirs.” The mark of abbreviation may have been
overlooked ; thus ‘33 became 3. There is an Egyptian word which
Brugsch and Canon Cook identify with the ’D of Exodus, viz.,
chenemms, the mosquito.

LI. 19. JomIN 19. This would mean ‘Who am I that I should
comfort you?’ which does not suit the passage. Probably there is an
error of the ear, and we should read yon. Comp. the false reading
aNd for ax5, Am. vili. 8; ws for &, 2 Sam. xiv. 9 5 TDN for aR),
Zech. iv. 2, &c. ; yi for Tyinq, Zech. xi. 13.

Lu. 5. Y839. As Del. (3rd ed.) remarks, the pointing is very
strange ; we should expect the Paul partic., or, if a reflexive at all
(which, however, seems out of place), Hithpoel and not Hithpoal.
Luzzatto’s view is very plausible, and in harmony with the pheno-
mena brought out so fully (perhaps too fully) by Geiger in his Ur-
schrift, He would point ys39, and accounts for the actual pointing
from an aversion on the part of the Massoretes to speak of Jehovah’s
name as ‘reviled.’ All that they succeeded in doing, however, was
to shroud the passage in obscurity.

Lu. 8 (end). On the view of the text adopted, Del. thinks we
should expect }yyb ; but the accus. doc? is amply justified (see 2 Sam.
xv. 34). At the end of my note (p. 38), I have sugested that ayy
might be taken as the short for nyaw aw ; comp. Ps. Ixxxv. 5, where
3221Y corresponds to apy myaw naw, v. 2 (Q’ri). One of the best
discussions of nyaw aw is by Dr. Kuenen, Zheologisch Tijdschrift,
1873, pp. 520-21. A priori, it certainly seems probable that nynv
and yw should be of cognate origin (comp. ‘to rejoice with a great
joy,’ &c.) ; and, as a matter of fact, the meaning ‘to restore the re-
storation of’ suits all the passages in which the phrase occurs, whereas
the alternative meaning does not. myn from ayy, as N97 from On
(Ezek. xxxii. 5), nib from nb=y (Prov. iv. 24).

LU. 15. 73% No word in the whole of the Old Testament so

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 167

forcibly exemplifies the urgent necessity for keeping the philological
department in exegesis separate from the theological. Through an
unfortunate failure in this respect, even Dr. Pusey is unable (be
it said with all respect) to state the facts of Hebrew usage accu-
rately! The truth is, as Dr. Taylor remarks, that ‘ parm does not
mean desprinkle (a person with a liquid), but sprinkle (a liquid upon a
person)’ ;? Mr. Urwick wholly misses the point when, after Reinke,
he quotes Lev. iv. 6, 17, in favour of the old rendering.? In one
point I entirely agree with Dr. Pusey, viz. that the reference of many
of the moderns to the Arabic zazd, ‘to leap,’ is out of place. The
case is parallel to that of niy in 1. 6. There areso many undoubtedly
Hebrew words both for ‘to help’ and ‘to leap,’ that it is quite un-
necessary to resort to the Arabic Lexicon. It is also worth noticing
(though the objection is not absolutely fatal) that zazé@ is rare in grave
and classical literature, being used properly of animals, and mostly
in an obscene sense. If a conjecture is to be ventured upon (for
Dr. Taylor’s new interpretation of mt\—see note on Essay X.—seems
the effort of despair), I would suggest 1h (if no one has offered it
before). The word occurs in Hab. iii. 6 (comp. Job xxxvii. 1) with
an implication of fear; but in another context it might be used
differently. A reference to Stade’s comparative table of the forms
of the Hebrew characters will show that the confusion between 1n'
and nr might easily have occurred.

Dr. Weir’s comment on this word and its context is peculiar. He
sees no difficulty in the omission of by or De after m3!, which he
regards as a justifiable poetical licence (as if a licence of this kind
were credible, when so much depended on intelligibility—consider
the position of this prophecy!) ; nor yet in the context, which he
considers to be in perfect harmony with the meaning ‘sprinkle.’ He
explains the connection thus:—‘ As many shrank back in horror
from him, as one unclean or accursed, . . . soshall he sprinkle many.
Many who looked upon him as unclean, and avoided and loathed
him as such, shall themselves be cleansed by him.’ But where is
the Servant said to be a priest ?

LIT. 3. DW om. Dr. Kay explains, ‘ ceasing to be of men’ ;
of so mean appearance that he ‘ was no longer reckoned with men’
(A. Ezra). But Job xix. 14, and the analogy of the Arabic khagilu
‘abstaining from aiding’ or ‘holding back from going with’ (Lane),
justifies the rendering adopted (so Del.).

1 The Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah according to the Fewish Translators, Intro-
duction to the English Translation, by Rev. E. B. Pusey, p. xxxviii.
> Review of The Fifty-third Chapter, &c., in the Academy, May 19, 1877,

P. 44%.

3 Urwick, The Servant of Fehovah, p. 102.

4 See Tayler Lewis, ‘The Purifying Messiah; Interpretation of Isa. lii. 13’; Bibdio-
theca Sacra, 1873, pp. 166-177.

168 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

Lut. 4. Many MSS,, Pesh., Vulg., insert xy before poaw. This
adds force, and Lowth and Bleek incline to accept it.

Lin. 5. wpb. 32 MSS. read wg’, and Dr. Weir suggests
spay ‘our retribution.’

Lui. 7. yi. LVifal tolerativum ; comp. v. 12, lv. 6, lxv. 1, Ps.
ii. 10, Gen. xiii. 16. We need not therefore quote Ex. x. 3 (with
Del.) ; the syncope of 1 in Nifal is questionable (see on i. 12), On
the syntax of the clause, see Del.’s note in his 3rd ed.

Lin, 8. 43) "ya-mN}. For the view of the construction, see
Ewald, Lehrbuch, § 277 d (=Hebr. Syntax, by Kennedy, p. 38),
where Ew. compares, not indeed our passage, but lvii. 15, Ezek.
xvii. 21, xliv. 3, Neh. ix. 19, and refers to the demonstrative force of
ns in the Hebrew of the Mishna.—To revert to the exegesis. Dr.
Weir thinks that lili. 8a is precisely parallel to xxxviii. 12, ‘my age
(i.e. my full life-circle, my lifetime) is cut off like a weaver’s web’;
but the meaning thus ascribed to 115 is arbitrary. 17 can only have
one of these three meanings—(a) ‘his contemporaries,’ (0) ‘those
like-minded with him’ (1 =a class of characters,! comp. Ps. xii. 8,
xiv. 5, Cxil. z, Prov. xxx. 11-14), or (c) ‘his dwelling,’ i.e. his grave
(comp. xxxviii. 12). Both (2) and (¢) anticipate unnaturally the
statements of subsequent verses ; Seinecke (approved by Riehm)
thinks that (4) is supported by the plural suffix in 195, but see next
note. (a) is favoured by the parallel passage, lvii. 1.

— 10d, I had already, in 1870, explained this mysterious
form (7. C. 4., p. 192) by a reference to the Phcenician suffix é or
ém for the 3rd pers. sing., following Schroder (Dre phénizische
Sprache, p. 153) and Bickell ( Zheologisches Literaturblatt, Bonn, 1869,
p- 366).2. Dr. Pusey, in 1877, notices the same linguistic fact (/Jezw-
ish Interpreters, &c., p. liii.), but overlooks his English predecessor.
The suffix éreminds us of course of Aramaic ; the appended m is
doubtless ‘a remnant of the primitive Semitic ‘“‘nunnation” or ‘‘ mim-
mation” ; in other words, the pronoun of the third person singular,
like the noun, was terminated by z or m.’ The same explanation in
all probability applies to the suffix in em in vii. 15 (sce note above),
and those in ad or émod in xliv. 15, Job xx. 23, xxii. 2, xxvil. 23, Ps.
xi. 7, but not to Gen. ix. 26, 27, Ps. xxviii. 8,% Ixxiii. 10 (where the
reference is collective). The o in the Hebrew form seems to point
to a marginal note, to the effect that 0 or @v was to be read, and not
amo or émo. The correct pronunciation would therefore seem to be

1 Or, as Del. untranslatably expresses it, ‘Einem Zeitgeist huldigende Zeitgenossen-
schaft' (on Ps. xii. 8).

2 See also Stade in Morgenlindische Forschungen (1875), p. 202, &c. ; Lehrbuch
der hebr. Gramm. (1879), Pp. 205.

3 But here we should probably read, with Scpt., youd.

CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES. 169

bem, lem, paném, &c.—It is quite true, as my late friend Dr. Diestel
observed, that the above merely proves the possibility that 19> may
be singular; but when the remainder of this paragraph (putting aside
the dubious 1'n3) is so strikingly individualising in its phraseology,
have we not a right to demand that of two possible meanings that
one should be chosen which harmonises with this cast of phraseology ?
Dr. Diestel certainly misses the mark when he maintains that my
view is against the usage of II. Isaiah, referring to Tey) in xliv. 15, as
‘also collective.’ It is noteworthy that both Pesh. and Vulg. under-
stand the suffix to be singular ; Targ., however, to be plural. Sept.
read ‘1105 i.e, mod. In support of this, see Kennicott’s note in Lowth,
Geiger (Wachgelassene Schriften, iv. 80), and above, on xlix. 12.

Lu. 9. wy. To the difficulty urged in my note (p. 49), I may
add that to use '3¥ synonymously with q»pn or py is quite natural,
for ‘3 is etymologically ‘humble,’ and ‘humility’ is the fundamental
note of Biblical piety. But swy has not the parallel root-meaning
of ‘proud.’ It is therefore not without some reason that Del. has
abandoned the view which he held as lately as 1864 (A/iod, 1% Ausg.,
note on xxi. 28), viz. that ‘rich’ here = ‘ ungodly,’ and now maintains
that there is an antithesis between the first clause and the second—
‘ He was appointed to be buried with deceased malefactors, but when
dead he was appointed to lie in a rich man’s grave.’ But this (equally
with the traditional orthodox explanation) requires an inversion of
the prophet’s words. —Ewald (and so Z. C. 4.) conjectures piv’y (comp.
Jer. xxii. 3); Krochmal emends p'yy 5 into pyyip, and -wy into
oye.

ynoa. There is no evidence that D'nd was used for
‘the state of death,’ on the analogy of 0m; nor yet for ‘ violent
death,’ which is rather oni, Ezek. xxviii. 8 (which determines the
reading of v. 10), and even Dnt) is only used in construction with
a collective noun. The alternatives are either to read 1:3 or inda3,
The former, which is the reading of three of De Rossi’s MSS.,? is ren-
dered either ‘his tombs’ or ‘his tomb,’ according as we suppose the
subject of the prophecy to bea collective term or areal person : in the
latter case the plural will be honorific (comp. ni23w1, Isa. liv. 2, Ps.
cxxxil. 5). I much doubt, however, whether 7123 will bear the render-
ing ‘tomb.’ It is true there is the analogy of #33 in Job xxi. 32,
but the very definite use of 792, both in Biblical and in Rabbinic
Hebrew, for ‘high place’ or ‘altar,’ makes this wider use highly im-
probable. Ezek. xliii. 7 has been quoted in its favour, but in that

1 Knobel’s Yesaiz, 4te Aufl., von Dr. L. Diestel (1872), p. 444. r
2 Ibn Ezra keeps the reading y3n)93, but gives ’y the sense of * tomb,’ and says

that it has two constructforms of the plural, like p*4p-

170 CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES.

passage we ought, with the Babylonian Codex, to point oni03. On
the whole, I prefer }n3 ; an intrusive * is no novelty in the O. T.
text. ‘In his death’ = after his death (Lev. xi. 31, &c.) ; cf. Shake-
speare’s ‘Speak me fair in death.’

LIL. 10. On. I understand this as referring to 1837 (comp.
Mic. vi. 13, Nah. iii. 19), but not as grammatically in combination
with it. This seems the most natural view.
own. The difficulty of rendering the text-reading za-
turally is obvious, whether we prefer to make nin or 1wB) the sub-
ject. A similar error in Ps. xlix. 19.

LUI, 12, O°D72. The rendering adopted is the only one fully
in harmony with the parallel line. The alternative is to take the
preposition distributively, as serving to specialise the contents of the
pen; comp. e.g. Gen, xxilii 18 (Job xxxix. 17, often referred to, is
an unfortunate example, for it would suggest that the pon only in-
cluded a part, and not the whole, of the 0°29). Del.’s note on
this passage is obscurely expressed, and seems inconsistent with his
translation,

Liv. 9. The Babylonian Codex has %'3; so also Saad., who
deviates but rarely from the Mas. text (see on xlix. 17). Sept. read
‘19, a corruption, thinks Del., of ‘7D.

Liv. 15. 12) The renderings ‘sojourn,’ ‘congregate,’ do not suit
the context. As Ewald rightly holds, 33 borrows its meaning here
trom 193 (comp. Jyy—ATY, 1a—Ara. y—mty), as in Ps. cxl. 3.

——— dp poy. Alt. rend., which brings before us Israel’s
moral conquest of his enemies, is not in harmony with the context,
which speaks only of the failure of their hostile enterprises. Besides,
as Dr. Kay points out, the preposition here precedes the verb ; where
the phrase oy 5p) or? ®} means ‘to join the opposite party,’ the
preposition follows. Perhaps, however, this is too subtle a distinction.

Liv. 17 ywoin. Comp. Syriac £40 ‘to be defeated,’ 2a ‘to
conquer,’

Lv. 13. Dw. This is one of the passages which seem to require
the rendering ‘monument’ (note Nis in the parallel clause). See
also especially lvi. 5, Ps. cxxxviii. 2 (observe $3, which hardly suits
the rend. ‘ name’), (2 Sam. iii. 13, Gen. xi. 4). In fact, if Ges,’s
etymology be accepted, this should be the primary meaning of the
word.

LVI. 11. Read o'yon Apn.

Lvit. 3 end, 731m). Ewald explains the whole rhrase, ‘seed of
him who broke wedlock, and she consequently (Vav consecutive)
committed whoredom’ (Lehrbuch, § 351 6); he compares Dan. viil.

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 171

22. But the construction does not suit the style of our passage.
Klostermann reads 13%) NDN2, simplifying the construction at the
expense of a tautology.

Lv. 8. O79. Graetz restores any (Aonatsschrift, 1883, p. II4).

LVI, 13. )yyap. Sept. év ry GAdpe cov, ‘ probably reading
Py or snpiya, an indication that there was some different ar-
rangement of the letters of the text, and apparently favouring yy\pw.’
Dr. Weir.

Lv. 20. G. Hoffmann’s corrections w133 and: yw (cf. wa) do
not improve the sense. (Stade’s Zeitschrift, 1883, p. 122.) For the
nuance acquired by wrap comp. Am. viii. 8, where the sense of awry)
is defined by the preceding pnby, as well as by the following mpw
(read mypw3). ‘Heaping up’ gives the notion rather of immobility
than of unrest.

Lvl. 6. ‘The ancient versions seem to have had a different text.’
Dr. Weir.

Lv. 7. Oo”. Read O77. An accidental transposition, as
in 2 Kings xi. 2, where the k’thibh is, by an obvious error, oynyon.
Ewald apparently supposes a peculiarity of pronunciation in both
cases (Lehrbuch, § 131 d); but surely this is improbable. Del.
assumes a secondary formation from 19, viz. T7'2, of which the form
in the text would be a passive participle.

LVIII. II. pon. The ancient versions stumbled at this word,
and it is possible that we have here a very ancient corruption of
mom, ‘he shall renew.’ But we need not in this case read ANyy,
‘thy strength’ (as Secker and Lowth) ; Hupfeld (on Ps. vi. 3) well
compares Ps. xxxii. 3, ‘my bones waxed old.’

LVI. 12. ‘JOO. ‘Should we not read 792?’ Dr. Weir. The
text-reading is, of course, not untranslatable, but there is no obvious
reason here for such a construction. The case is different in Ps.
Ixviii. 27, Job xviii. 15.

LIX. 3. sdyehp. The same form (the passive of the Arabic seventh
verbal stem) occurs in Lam. iv. 14. It is odd that it should only
occur as a derivation of $x. Luzzatto suspects that the authors
of the points wished to avoid a confusion with 1x22, from bya, ‘to
redeem.’

Lx. 18. Sys, The versions seem to have found this gramma-
tical anomaly unintelligible ; so too Bp. Lowth, who adopts >va for
by from Targ. (see his note).

LxI. 1. The difficulty of :the closing words lies in the fact that
npb is elsewhere only used of the eyes or (once, viz. xlii. 20) of the
ears. We should therefore expect mipnpb omy. It is tempting
to suppose that we have in the Massoretic text a combination of two

172 CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES,

readings—one, that just quoted (favoured by Sept.), and the other
minnns omondy (favoured by Pesh., Vulg.). Thisis the view of Dr.
Neubauer, who remarks that a combination of this sort, where manu-
script authorities were equally divided, would be quite in the spirit of
the Massoretic critics (Academy, June 11, 1870). Comp. a plausible
explanation of the famous Sevreporporw in Luke vi. 1, as a combina-
tion of two readings devrépw and purty.

LxI. 2, 3. The text is evidently indisorder. Bickell’s corrections
(see vol. i. ad loc.) explain themselves.

LXIII. 3. DD778). Point this, and the corresponding verbs in this
and the following verses, according to the rule of ‘ vav consecutive.’
So Luzzatto. It is only those who are unaware of the numerous
instances in which, from exegetical or theological peculiarities, or from
some obscure causes, the Massoretic punctuation is entirely or proba-
bly erroneous, who will accuse such a proceeding of uncritical rashness.
Here the cause of the wrong pointing is patent—it is the theory, em-
balmed in that other record (the Massoretic punctuation being also
one) of early Jewish exegetical traditions, the Targum, that this section
of prophecy relates to the future (comp. on xliii. 28). It is singular
that in v. 5 the authors of the points should have allowed themselves
to write ym}, mechanically following lix. 16. This is one of those
inconsistencies which occasionally puzzle us in the Massoretic punc-
tuation.—Comp. Driver, Hebrew Tenses, § 84 a, 176, Obs. 1 (he in-
clines to agree as to 191).

sndyax. The initial 8 is miswritten by an Aramaism for
m1; comp. Jer. xxv. 3, and perhaps Mic. vii. 15.

Lx. 9. Dr. Kay objects that 7 y can only mean ‘he was re-
duccd to a strait,’ ‘which, of course, is not suitable here.’ But it is
as suitable as any other anthropomorphic expression (see, e.g., lix. 16).
For the position of i$ see comm. on xliii. 22.

Lx. 11. The reason why the accents unite Y nw appears from
Targ., which paraphrases ‘the mighty deeds which he had done
through Moses to his people.’

The Babylonian Codex has ‘y4 ; Baer, too, adopts this as
the Massoretic reading. This determines the subject of }37>p3.

Lx. 15. The meaning ‘habitation’ has been generally ac-
quiesced in, but seems very uncertain, and has no philological foun-
dation. The verb Sar is found only in Gen. xxx. 20, where it
is commonly rendered ‘ dwell (with me),’ not to suit the context, but
in obedience to a prejudice as to the meaning of >a} (although Sept.
renders aiperce? pe). The writer himself seems to have felt that the
root Sat was unfamiliar to his readers, and he therefore selects an
alternative root 731 to illustrate par. We are evidently justified in

CRITICAL AND PHILOLOGICAL NOTES. 173

expecting some light from the allied languages, especially from
Assyrian. In Chaldee, bar and the cognate words have no connec-
tion with the idea of ‘dwelling,’ but with that of ‘manure.’ In
Arabic, too, according to Lane, zada/a means—1. to dung, manure ;
2. to bear, carry. The latter meaning is important for us, for M.
Stanislas Guyard has lately pointed out! that Assyrian also possesses
the root zabd/u=naséi (xy) in the sense of ‘bearing’ (whence zabz/
kudurri,? ‘crown-bearer’ = Arab. wazir [vizier], a title of the kings
tributary to Assyria), and hence of ‘elevating.’ My friend Mr.
Sayce corroborates the meaning of ‘elevation’ for zaba/ by a refer-
ence to bilingual tablets (see, ¢.g., the British Museum Inscriptions,
vol. ii. p. 15, 1. 45), where the Accadian sag-z/, or sag-gaé (Haupt), lit.
‘high head,’? is explained by the Assyrian zada/Z, It cannot be
denied that several passages of the Old Testament gain in force if we
explain Sar on the analogy of zabal. How suitably, for instance,
does Solomon, after alluding to Jehovah’s dwelling in ‘thick clouds,’
refer to the newly built temple as a bat n‘a ‘a house of height’
(i Kings xii. 12, 13, comp. ix. 8a), a house which by its elevation
pointed men upwards to the heavenly temple (comp. Isa. vi. 4)!
How apposite is the same sense of ‘elevation’ in a description of
the sun and moon (Hab. iii. 11)! How finely does the Psalmist
(Ps. xlix. 15) suggest the contrast between the palaces (p71 from
the idea of height) of the worldly-minded rich and the ‘castle’4 of
Shedl (comp. Job xxxviii. 17)! In Gen. xxx. 20, where the verb
occurs, the rendering ‘extol,’ ‘honour’ (closely approached by Sept ),
is certainly appropriate, and, as M. Guyard remarks, avoids the
necessity of understanding a preposition. In the passage of Isaiah
before us, the gain in force by substituting ‘height’ for ‘habitation’
is obvious. Of course, a vague sense like ‘habitation’ may just
suffice for the passages in which yt occurs. But what greater claim
has it than ‘elevation’? The supposed tradition in its favour seems
really to be based on a guess. On the other hand, the proposed
rendering is supported by indisputable evidence from a north Semitic
vocabulary.

Lx. 15. We might take the second part of the verse as a ques-
tion, with Dr. Gritz, who also reads 43%>3¢ (comp. Sept.).

1 *Remarques sur le mot assyrien zaéa/,' &e., in Yournal asiatigue, aotit-sept ,
1878, pp. 220-5; cf. Friedr. Delitzsch, Hebrew and Assyrian (1883), pp. 38, 39
Schrader, K. A. 7., ed. 2, pp. 185-6. A part of M. Guyard’s evidence, however,
seems doubtful.

2 Mr. Norris, with exemplary self-restraint, left this title untranslated in 1868
(Assyrian Dictionary, i. 310).

5 Comp. 130 and 227« in the Syllabary in Sayce’s Elementary Assyrian Grammar,

4 In Ps. 2c, the least we can do is to point (with Ew., Hitz.) 3311); more pro-

bably the 99 is a fragment of ody (Bickell). But the old rend. ‘glory’ (Sept., Vulg.,
but not St. Jerome's version, and virtually Targ.) can be used as a testimony for the
true meaning of the root.

174 CRITICAL AND PIIILOLOGICAL NOTES.

Lx. 19. The versions (see p. 110) certainly favour the supposi-
tion of corruptness, though II. Isaiah does contain rather extreme
cases of constructions in which the logical syntax is not expressed,
e.g. xli. 2 @, 24, xlviil. 14 8. Prof. Driver compares Gen. xxxi. 40, Job
xil. 4.

LxIv. 4 (5). ans. Gritz (AZonatsschrift, 1880, p. 52) reads pny;
“formerly thou wast favourable, but zozw thou art wroth.’ But there
is an emphasis in the pny (how often the personal pronoun is used
when Jehovah speaks !). ‘It was because ¢ow, whose nature is to
be gracious, becamest angry,’ &c,

nono. The rend. adopted seems called for (as against
Del.’s) by the statement at the end of v. 6 (7).
ody ons. To illustrate Ew.’s view of the passage, comp.
iii. 12 (note above). It is against it, however, that myp is never
elsewhere constructed with 3. Del. takes nna in a neuter sense (so
St. Jerome, ‘in ipsis,’ sc. peccatis) ; comp. xxx. 6, xxviii. 16, xliv. 15,
Ezek. xxxiii. 18. Possible ; but probable here?

LXV. 15. 32)n"0m). The suffixseems to me to prove that this is
a fragment of a formula of imprecation. Not, however, the opening
words. Hence the perfect need not be the precative, the existence
of which is doubtful (see on xliii. 9), nor need we be surprised by
the omission of 073 or 72N3.

LXvI. 11. 1%. The sense ‘udder’ seems required by the paral-
lelism, and may be justified by Assyr. zwz, ‘to come forth’ (refer-
ences in Schrader, A. 4. 7, ed. 2, p. 550). Rodiger mentions a
vulgar Arabic word ziza, ‘udder ;’ and Judah ben Karish (Koreish),
in his Risdlet or letter to the Jews of Fez, quotes a similar ‘barbar-
ous’ word with the same meaning (on the latter, see Ewald and
Dukes, Bettrige zur Gesch. der altesten Auslegung, 1. 118). Lagarde
would read 1'2 ; Nt! is the equivalent of 1% in the Targum of the
first line of 7. 11 and in lx. 16. The sense of ‘abundance’ ordina-
rily given has not been well made out ; the transition from radiation
or from offspring to plenty is unnatural. The ancient versions only
guess,

ESSAYS

ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE COMMENTARY
ON ISAIAH.

*

I. THE OCCASIONAL PROPHECIES OF ISAIAH
IN THE LIGHT OF HISTORY.

I.

THE editor of a modern classic of the interest and importance
of the Book of Isaiah would naturally preface his illustrations
with a life of his author. But of Isaiah what has the editor
to tell? Later legend, indeed, hovered busily about the
prophet ;' but, except as giving evidence of his posthumous
influence, its imaginative creations are of no interest to the
student of Isaiah. The prophet is not, however, a mere
name, vox et preterea nihil, for his works are the monuments
of a widely-reaching activity ; and through his teaching, and
probably through a scanty but enthusiastic band of disciples,?
he was the means of beginning, or at any rate of greatly
strengthening, that remarkable phase of belief which we may
call, in the literal sense of the word, the Messianic. Of the
latter I shall say more in a subsequent essay ; my immediate
subject is the place of Isaiah in the history of his times, and
the chronological arrangement of his extant * prophecies.

By thus limiting my subject, I do not intend to deny that
Isaiah, by some of his prophecies, was an important factor in
the history of later times—-that he foretold, and by foretelling
contributed to bring about (for such is the Biblical doctrine of
prophecy ‘), events long subsequent to his own age ; but I am
equally far from affirming it. Either course would require
me to carry my researches into the domain of the ‘higher
criticism,’ whereas at present, in the interests of the student,
I have limited myself to the functions of an exegete, and
only pretend to set before the reader the facts (sometimes
the conflicting facts) supplied by the text itself.

1 One Rabbinic authority makes Amoz, the father of Isaiah, a brother of King
Amaziah, and there is a general agreement that Isaiah himself was martyred by being
sawn asunder at the order of Manasseh. (See references in Gesenius, Commentar uber
dn Fesaia, i. 3-15.) The former story is evidently based on an etymological fancy ;
the latter may have been occasioned by Isa. lii. 13-liii. 12, (So Fiirst, Geschichte der
biblischen Literatur, ii. 393. )

? Comp. viii. 12-16, xxviii. 23-29; both passages presuppose such a band of
disciples.

3 For of course we have no reason to assume that all Isaiah's prophetic writings
have been preserved.

4 Comp. notes on ix. 8,.lv. rx. This doctrine of the self-fulfilling power of pro-

phecy explains the imprisonments of Micaiah and Jeremiah, and a similar belief is
presupposed in the narrative of Balaam (Num. xxii. 6).

VOL, II. N

178 ESSAYS.

The prophecies with which I am now concerned are the
occasional ones—that is, those which were called forth by
passing events, and are at any rate based on public discourses
of Isaiah. <A difference of opinion in specifying these is
hardly possible, except in the case of xxi. I-10, but critics
are very much divided as to the time when the prophecies
were composed. Nor can this be greatly wondered at. In
the first place, Israclitish history has only come down to us
in fragments. If even the plays of Aristophanes contain
numerous obscure allusions, though the author lived subse-
quently to the rise of history (éctopén), how much more
should we expect this to be the case with the religious litera-
ture of a nation with no gift for scientific research! In the
second place, it is evident from the form of not a few pro-
phecies that they are summaries of discourses delivered at
various times ; and even when it is not so, the cultivated style
of the oracles sufficiently proves that they have been much
altered since the time of delivery ; we cannot, therefore, be
sure that they give an absolutely faithful picture of the
prophet’s original feelings and circumstances. Hence a
distinction must be drawn between two entirely separate
objects of inquiry—viz. 1. the date of Isaiah’s original dis-
course or discourses, and 2. that of the final editing of the
discourse or summarising of the discourses.!

But it may be asked, Have we not already in the Book
of Isaiah itself an authoritative chronological arrangement ?
This is the view of Hengstenberg. ‘In the first six chapters,’
remarks this celebrated critic, ‘we obtain a survey of the
prophet’s ministry under Uzziah and Jotham. Chap. vii. to
x. 4 belongs to the time of Ahaz. From x. 4 to the end of
chap xxxv. everything belongs to the time of the Assyrian
invasion in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah ; in the face of
which invasion the prophetic gift of Isaiah was displayed as
it had never been before. The section, chap. xxxvi.-xxxix.,
furnishes us with the historical commentary on the preceding
prophecies from the Assyrian period, and forms, at the same
time, the transition to the second part, which still belongs to
the same period.’?. The faults of this theory are, 1. that it
implies the infallibility of the later Jewish editors of Isaiah,
and 2, that it regards the prophecies of Isaiah, or at any
rate those in the first part, as if they had been sent out into
the world singly, whereas internal evidence strongly favours
the view that underlying our present book there are several
partial collections, made either by Isaiah, or by Isaiah’s dis-

1 See 7. C. A., introduction, p. xii.
® Christology of the Old Testament, ii, 2, 3.

ESSAYS. 179

ciples, or perhaps some by the former, and others by the
latter. If we accept this position, it will be extremely un-
likely that after the combination of these small collections
the prophecies should turn out to be in exact chronological
order. In fact, before the recent Assyrian discoveries it
seemed easy to show that this was no less improbable than
the similar view that the Minor Prophets, as they stand, are
in chronological order ; for how could the section x. 5—xii. 6,
evidently written in the crisis of an invasion, be rightly
placed so far from chaps. xxviii—xxxii., which only express
an increasing confidence that an invasion was inevitable ?
The discovery of the large part played by Sargon in the
affairs of Palestine has, it is true, made Hengstenberg’s
position a more tenable one. The prophecy in x. 5-xii. 6
may conceivably refer to the invasion of Sargon, and those in
XXVili—xxxii. to that of Sennacherib.! Hence it is less sur-
prising that, after being abandoned by scholars in general,
Hengstenberg’s view should again be independently main-
tained by Mr. George Smith the Assyriologist.? Still, some
of the old objections to it remain in full force. Some pro-
phecies (e.g. chap. i. and chap. xvii. I-11) cannot be in their
right chronological order, unless the remarks in the preceding
commentary are very far wrong indeed. The evidence for
the existence of groups of prophecies is, moreover, too strong
to be disregarded ; and it would argue a mean estimate of
the intellect of those who formed these groups to suppose
that chronology was their only guide, and that affinity of
subjects had no influence on their selection of prophecies.

I assume, then, that the actual order of the prophecies in
the Book of Isaiah is not strictly chronological. The results
of the present work, however, tend to show that the devia-
tions from chronological accuracy are not considerable. A
brief summary will make this at once clear, and serve as a
table of contents to the introductions in the preceding com-
mentary.

Isaiah came forward as a young prophet (vi. 1) in the
year of the death of Azariah,? that warlike and enterprising
monarch, who ventured to defy Assyria by heading a con-
federacy of discontented Syrian powers. Jotham, the next

1 This is certainly conceivable, but far from probable, as the phraseological points
of coniact between the prophecy in x. 5-xii. 6 and chaps. xxvill. xxix. (see vol. i. p.
67) naturally net a contemporary origin.

2 T. S. B. A., ii. (1873), 328-9.

5 The: text of Isa. vi. 1 calls him Uzziah, and so 2 Kings xv. 13, 2 Chr. xxvi.; but
the name is given as Azariah in 2 Kings xv. 21, and in the contemporary Assyrian
inscriptions as Azriyau. On the Syrian coalition, see vol. i, p. 41, and note the refer-
ence to Schrader.

N2

180 ESSAYS.

king, was as secular in tastes as his father, and the denuncia-
tions in chap. ii. and in ix. 8-x. 4 may well have been
delivered in substance during his reign. In these sterner
passages our prophet reminds us of his predecessor Amos.
But as soon as a real calamity draws near, the tone of his
discourses begins to soften, and the passages which we
naturally turn to as typical of his genius are centred in the
three invasions of Judah by Rezin, Sargon, and Sennacherib.,
Rezin and his Israelitish vassal were already at the gates of
Jerusalem when Isaiah delivered the substance of the pro-
phecies in vii. 1-ix. 7, famous as containing the first distinct
predictions of the Messiah. Chap. xvii. 1-11 evidently
belongs to the same period, but is probably a little earlier
than vii. I-ix. 7. In 724 (?) Shalmaneser opened that siege
of Samaria which was so soon brought to its fatal end by
Sargon,' and we may presume that chap. xxviii. embodies
the discourses of Isaiah on that striking occasion; but
Shalmaneser has left but little impression on the Israelitish
literature compared with Sargon, his successor. It is to this
king’s interference with the affairs of Judah? that we are, as
I believe, indebted for the following important group of
prophecies :—
Chap. xiv. 29-32, a prophecy on Philistia,
Chap. xix. 1-16, a prophecy on Egypt.
Chap. xx., a prophecy on Egypt and Ethiopia.
Chap. xxix.-xxxil., a prophecy on the Egyptian alliance and the Assyrian
invasion.
Chap. x. 5—xi. 16, a prophecy on the Assyrian invasion and the times
following.
Chap. xxii., a prophecy on the siege of Jerusalem.
Chap. i., a prophecy on the spiritual lessons of the invasion.

(Perhaps also chap. xvi. 13, 14, the epilogue attached to an
older prophecy on Moab, and chap. xxi. 11-17, containing
short prophecies on Dumah and Kedar.)

The Philistines, destined to suffer so much from Assyria,
were already hankering after independence, when Isaiah
wrote the short prophecy in xiv. 29-32: ‘The rod which
smote them’ (z.e. Shalmaneser) was ‘broken,’ but the prophet
warned them that the new king (Sargon) would dart upon
them like a basilisk, and punish them for their disobedience.
The unfavourable ‘oracle of Egypt’ (xix. 1-16) probably
comes from the same period. The ‘hard lord’ into whose

1 There is some doubt respecting the chronological limits of the siege of Samaria;
it is safest, however, to follow Sargon's express statement, that he captured Samaria
in the beginning of his reign, See further Schrader, A. G. #., pp. 314-15 ; Smith,
The Eponym Canon, p. 175.

* See introd, to x. 5-xii, 6 (vol. i. pp. 67-69).

ESSAYS. 18!

hand the Egyptians are to be delivered (xix. 4) is Sargon,
and the event pointed to is the defeat of Shabaka, King of
Egypt and Ethiopia, B.c. 720, near the Philistine town of
Raphia. It does not appear that Sargon interfered with
Judah on this occasion. Hezekiah had probably refrained
from assisting Shabaka, so that the Assyrian army would
naturally keep to the coast-road. The security of Judah will
also perhaps account for the falling off in style which has
been noticed in chap. xix. When the danger was nearer
home, the prophet’s voice became trumpet-toned.

The woes denounced on Egypt in chap. xix. were not
immediately realised, and in chap. xx. Isaiah renews his
warning. Still, the results of the battle of Raphia were by
no means insignificant. To Rahab, ‘the arrogant one’ (such
was the symbolic name of Egypt in Hebrew: see on xxx. 7),
the acknowledgment of Assyrian supremacy was galling in
the extreme ; a still greater national calamity was the dis-
memberment of the country (see introduction to chap. xx.).
That Hezekiah should have thought it worth while after this
to seek Egyptian assistance is a fact so improbable that
nothing short of Isaiah’s authority (see chaps. xxx. xxxi.)
could establish it. Chap. xxix. also belongs in substance to
this period ; it declares that Jerusalem itself is in imminent
peril. Shortly after, in xxxii. 9-20, the prophet repeats his
denunciation to the frivolous ladies of Jerusalem.

Nor are these the only words spoken by the great prophet
at this dark period. The two prophecies on the Egyptian
alliance contain some passages which clearly refer to this
later stage in the history. Thus chap. xxx. 18-33 evidently
assumes that the people of Judah are actually suffering from
an Assyrian invasion, and xxxi. 4 announces that Jehovah
will, as it were, personally descend, and fight for Jerusalem.
We are, in fact, in the midst of the first of the two invasions
under Hezekiah, when Sargon (ze. probably his Tartan, or
commander-in-chief) took ‘all the fenced cities of Judah.’!
Hezekiah had probably followed the example of Yavan, King
of Ashdod, and refused the usual tribute to the King of
Assyria ; so, at least, we may infer from the statement of
Sargon that the Judahites who used to bring tribute were
“speaking treason.’? The fate of Ashdod seemed likely to
become that of Jerusalem, and Isaiah (who had already
pointed out the danger, xx. 6) felt the urgency of the call for
prophetic admonition. Of his discourses during this critical
period at least three appear to have been preserved—chap. x.

1 2 Kings xviii, 13 (=Isa. xxxvi. 1), On this passage, see vol. i. p. 202
2 See introd. to chap. xx, (vol. i. pp. 122-3),

182 ESSAYS.

5-xii. 6, chap. xiv. 24-27, and chap. xxii. The date of the
first two is absolutely certain (see introds.), and even Dr.
Robertson Smith admits that they were written in the time
of Sargon.! The only reasonable doubt can be with regard to
chap. xxii. the explanation of which, as the student will have
seen, requires a more than ordinary degree of exegetical tact.

At length the tide of invasion turned, and very soon
afterwards, if I am not mistaken, in a case which again espe-
cially calls for tact, Isaiah wrote (not spoke) one of his most
beautiful prophecies, chap. i. The generality of its contents
(which marks it out as composed for an introduction) makes
it unusually difficult to pronounce upon its date; yet there is
some internal evidence which points to the time of Sargon’s
invasion. It would, in fact, be an incongruity if a prophet
like Isaiah had been able to compose a purely literary work.

Three years after the subjugation of Judah occurred an
event second only in importance for Palestine to the battle of
Raphia—the conquest of Babylonia by Sargon (710). From
a narrative certainly based on an early tradition (2 Kings
xx. 12, &c.=Jsa. xxxix. 1, &c.), we may probably infer that
Hezekiah had had some thoughts of a Babylonian alliance.
Isaiah would, of course, be opposed to this, but the fall of
Babylon: must have profoundly shocked him as an evidence
of the (humanly speaking) irresistible progress of Assyria.
The prophecy in xxi. 1-10, which, taken by itself, is so ob-
scure,” seems in most respects easier of explanation if we
refer its origin to the siege of Babylon in 710. I say ‘in
most respects,’ for I do not deny the striking plausibility of
some of the arguments for a Captivity origin.

Isaiah took no narrow view of his prophetic mission, and
the fall of Babylon was, according to him, a warning to other
nations besides his own. ‘Behold the land of Chaldea,’ he
cried to the proud merchant people of Pheenicia ; ‘this people
is no more’ (xniii.13). Indeed, Tyre was nearer to the com-
mon foe, and had a still better reason for alarm (in propor-
tion to its greater power) than the second-rate or third-rate
kingdom of Judah. So sure is Jehovah’s prophet of the
catastrophe that he bursts into an elegiac ode on the ruin of
Zidan’s greatest daughter. The concluding verses of the
chapter, however, which form no part of the elegy, and seem

1 The Prophets of Israel (1882), pp. 297-8.

? The obscurity consists in the depression into which the writer apparently falls at
the news of the fall of Babylon. In /. C. 4., p. xxvii, I conjectured that he was
‘almost unmanned by affection for his adopted home.’ But this is not very probable
in a pious Jewish exile, and the theory of a Babylonian origin is also opposed (though
not, of course, absolutely disproved) by the numerous points of contact with Isaiah
(sce vol. i. p. 125).

ESSAYS. 183

to have been added by an afterthought, prophesy a revival of
Tyre at the end of ‘seventy years.’!

The third event which called forth the energies of the
prophet was the invasion of Sennacherib ; the attendant cir-
cumstances have been described already (vol. i. pp. 206-7).
Great as the war was—greater even than the invasion of
Sargon—only four of the extant prophecies appear to have
been originated byit. These are chap. xviii. chap. xvii. 12-14,
chap. xxxiii., and chap. xxxvii. 22-35 (or 32). The first of
the four was evidently produced by the news of the approach
of the Assyrians, and the consequent excitement of the
warlike Ethiopians. The second and third were (according
to the historical sketch referred to above) probably composed
during the march of the Assyrian general, who, after captur-
ing forty-six fortified towns, was so wonderfully and provi-
dentially checked beneath the walls of Jerusalem. The fourth
has all the incisive energy which we should expect from the
circumstances under which the Book of Isaiah itself declares
it to have been delivered.

2.

Such now appears to me, upon a reconsideration of the
subject, to be a more probable chronological arrangement of
these prophecies than I was able to offer in 1870—it is at
any rate more personal and independent. My endeavour has
been to avoid arbitrary conjecture, and, whenever practicable,
to explain the prophet’s allusions from the contemporary
Assyrian inscriptions. I confess, therefore, to some disappoint-
ment when that excellent scholar, Dr. Robertson Smith, ex-
presses the opinion that one of the historical bases of the
preceding sketch is unsound, and that ‘the mere statement of
this hypothesis is sufficient to show its extreme improbability.’?
A page or two in reply to Dr. Robertson Smith’s leading ob-
jections is indispensable to complete this essay.

Did Sargon invade Judah, and threaten, or even capture
Jerusalem, or not? The grounds for maintaining that he did
have been already given; the documentary evidence is, no
doubt, scanty, still it exists, and historical probability is strongly
in favour of this view. Dr. Robertson Smith’s counter argu-
ment has not yet been put in a complete form; but appear-
ances rather indicate that he has been biassed by a partiality
for a distinguished recent critic.

1 Hence one of the arguments for the view that the epilogue. as we may call these
verses, is the work of some unknown writer at the close of the Babylonian exile.

Against it see my note on xxiii. 15-18.
» The Prophets of Israel (1882), p. 206,

184 ESSAYS.

In admiration for Julius Wellhausen’s brilliant genius I
hardly yield to Dr. Robertson Smith. But I cannot help
adding that his insight is sometimes marred by excessive
self-assertion. His personal dislikes are indeed painfully
visible in some of his critiques in the Gottingen Gelehrte
Anzeigen, and his bias against Assyriology (shared, it is true,
by others in Germany) comes out very strongly in an article
in vol. xx. of the Jahrbiicher fiir deutsche Theologie (1875).
replied to with exemplary calmness by Schrader, in vol. ii. 0
the Jahrbiicher fiir protestantische Theologie (1876), in his
article on ‘The Azriyahu of the cuneiform inscriptions, and
the Azaryah of the Bible.” Iam the more confirmed in my
opinion that Dr. Robertson Smith has been ‘misled’ by
German influences, when I notice his own insufficient esti-
mate of the value of the Assyriologists’ work in p. 377 of
The Prophets of Israel, where Gutschmid’s extravagant attack
on Assyriology is characterised as setting forth the state of
things very forcibly, though perhaps (!) with an extreme of
scepticism,’ and no mention is made of Schrader’s reply, so
impressive from its honesty and documentary completeness,
in the K. G.F.

Dr. Robertson Smith objects to the view which I have
advocated, that it represents Judah as suffering ‘precisely in
the same way, and to the same extent,’ both from Sargon and
Sennacherib, that ‘history does not repeat itself exactly,’ and
that ‘we must conclude that Isaiah held precisely similar
language in the two cases, and that he did this in the second
invasion without making any reference back to the events of
the siege which has called forth similar predictions two years
before’ (p. 295). ‘Precisely’ and ‘exactly’ are words that
shoot beyond the mark. It has not been asserted that his-
tory ‘repeated itself exactly,’ nor that Isaiah used ‘precisely
similar language’ in the two cases. History may surely have
repeated itself in the career of Hezekiah, as it did in that of
Merodach-Baladan, but the repetition need not have been
‘exact’; all that is claimed by Mr. Sayce and myself is a
parallelism between the two invasions. Next, with regard to
the language of Isaiah. It is true that, in both groups of
prophecies (those referring to Sargon as well as those to
Sennacherib), Isaiah is well assured that Jehovah will inter-
pose for Mount Zion; but is there not a variety amidst the
similarity ? In Sargon’s reign Isaiah says that the chief men
of the city have been captured, and that many of the inhabit-
ants of Jerusalem shall be slain (xxii. 3, 14); in Sennacherib’s,
he implies that all shall escape (xxxvii. 22). In Sargon’s he
declares that Jerusalem shall be reduced to extremities (xxix,

ESSAYS, 185

1-6); in Sennacherib’s, that the Assyrian shall not come
before the city, nor raise a bank against it (xxxvii. 33; see
vol. i. p. 207). In Sargon’s, his tone towards his countrymen
is most severe (xxii. 1-14; see vol. i. p. 132) ; in Sennacherib’s,
it is one of consolation and hope. Surely, if Sargon’s invasion
be denied, there is no choice but to follow a recent German
critic ' who, on the ground of the inconsistently severe tone of
xxii. I-14, expresses a grave doubt of its authenticity.

But why, asks Dr. Robertson Smith, did Isaiah make no
reference during Sennacherib’s invasion to the events of the
former crisis? The question could only be answered with
certainty from the contemporary Jewish annals, which we do
not possess. It may be that there were circumstances con-
nected with Sargon’s siege of Jerusalem, which it was no un-
mixed pleasure to remember (comp. chap. xxii.), but I do not
care to reconstruct history speculatively. Dr. Robertson
Smith thinks it also ‘highly improbable that . [Hezekiah]
would have been allowed to restore the Judean fortresses’
(p. 296). But Sargon, in his latter years, was enfeebled by
age ; and Sennacherib, on his accession, had work enough on
his hands nearer home, on his southern and eastern frontier.
Next, my friendly critic is surprised at, the non-mention of
any punishment of Judah in the Annals of Sargon, and ques-
tions whether the Book of Kings would have ignored an
invasion of Sargon had it really taken place. I have already
answered these objections? (vol. i. pp. 68-9), but I feel that
I should not be doing justice to this acute scholar if I assumed
that he attached special importance to such arguments. His
sceptical attitude is surely dictated by his chronological
theory, and the discussion of his and Wellhausen’s chronology
would lead me into digressions for which I am not now pre-
pared. I will agree to leave it an open question whether
Sargon really invaded Judah or not, provided it be admitted
that there is at least some evidence for it, and that to accept
the view throws a bright light on some very important pro-
phecies. Of course, all opinions on ancient history must be
held with acertain amount of reserve, and be liable to modifi-
cation or correction from more thorough criticism, or the
discovery of more complete evidence. Dr. Robertson Smith
is well able to contribute to this desirable result. Let me
add that if I have, in the foregoing commentary or elsewhere,
expressed myself too positively, I regret it, as it may perhaps
have encouraged his own too positive contradiction. At any

1 Dr. C. H. Cornill, in Stade’s Zet¢schrift, 1884, p. 96.
3 The absence of any reference to Assurbanipal, except under the mutilated form
Asnapper (Ezra iy. 10), may also be mentioned in this connection,

186. ESSAYS.

rate, he will, I know, echo the words with which I concluded
this essay in the first edition, that ‘ the prophecies have surely
become more vivid through being read in this new light, and
the character of Isaiah as a “ watcher” of the political as well
as spiritual horizon does but shine with a steadier and more
enlivening glow.’

II. THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE PROPHECIES.

I.

THAT there is some principle (or, that there are some prin-
ciples) of arrangement in the Book of Isaiah, is now universally
acknowledged. The book is no mere anthology of single
prophecies; this cannot be even said of chaps. i—xxxix.,
where a continuous thread of thought is undoubtedly wanting.
But the plan of the book is by no means easy to grasp. It
seems simple enough to suppose with Hengstenberg that the
prophecies in chaps. i-—xxxix. are arranged chronologically,
or with Vitringa that similarity of contents was the guiding
principle of the collector and editor. But neither theory can
be carried out without violence to facts. The suggestion has
therefore been offered to divide the book into four smaller
books or parts, viz. chaps. i-xii., chaps. xiii—xxiii., chaps.
XXiv.-Xxxv. (with its appendix, chaps. xxxvi-xxxix.), and
chaps. xl.—-Ixvi. ; and this view has been adopted by Gesenius,
Havernick, and (in 1856) Dr. S. Davidson. When, however,
we come to analyse these groups, we find that they are by no
means homogencous, and that there are several breaks in the
continuity. Hence Ewald and Delitzsch seem fully justified
in subdividing the book still further. These eminent scholars
differ widcly, it is true; the reason being that while Delitzsch
regards the prophet Isaiah as himself the sole author and
editor, Ewald postulates a variety of authors and several
editors. Controversy, however, is not my object. Those who
wish to see the thoughtful and only too ingenious arrange-
ment of Delitzsch can easily refer to his widely-known
commentary (Introduction, section 2). My own view on
the subject of this essay continues to be based on that of
Ewald, and, in offering it anew for acceptance, I would merely
remark that it is in no way bound up with any preconceived
ey as to the unity or plurality of the authorship of the
ook. !

' Dr. C. H. Cornill, in Stade'’s Zef/schrift, 1884, p. 83, &e., has offered an
explanation of the order of the prophecies, Which he thinks was to a great extent

ESSAYS. 187

It was stated in the present writer’s former edition of
Isaiah,’ that at any rate that part of the book which contains
occasional prophecies ‘appears to be composed of several
smaller books or prophetic collections.’ This view, I repeat,
will still be the most probable one, even if we should admit
the Isaianic authorship of the entire book. Let us see what
it is that it involves. ‘The chapter which opens the book in
the traditional arrangement is evidently intended as a general
introduction to a large group of prophecies. It is impossible,
however, to trace any distinct connection between that chapter
and the three following ones, which certainly constitute a
single homogeneous prophecy. Equally difficult is it to trace
a connection between chap. i. and chaps. vix. 4; the latter
chapters, with the exception of ix. 8—-x. 4’ (see vol. i. p. 63),
‘are as distinct and homogeneous as the prophecy already
mentioned.’ But there is a general agreement between the
historical circumstances of chap. i., of chaps x. 5—xi. 16, and
of most of the minor prophecies on foreign nations, all of
which were probably written under the shadow of the first
Assyrian invasion by Sargon. It seems therefore reason-
able to suppose that, after the retirement of Sargon, Isaiah
prepared ‘a new and enlarged edition of his works,’ consisting
of the two prophetic writings mentioned above (ii—v., and
vi. I-ix. 7), supplemented by x. 5-xii 6? (which once doubt-
less had an independent existence, and which was now inserted
as a pendant to the prophecy of Immanuel), and by most of
the prophecies on foreign nations.’ Later still, Isaiah, or some
of his disciples availing themselves. of his literary material,
made several insertions in his already extant works, and
added a new one to their numher_ The insertions are xiv.
24-27, originally an appendix to x. 5—xii. 6 (compare vol. i. p.
94), but displaced, xvii. 1-11, xvii. 12—xviii. 7, and, according to
conservative critics, xiii. I—xiv. 23, the last three of which were
included among the oracles on foreign nations.’ The only one
of these insertions which requires any special explanation is
the last-mentioned, and to this I will return presently. The

suggested by the recurrence of certain words (Stichworte, ‘cues') in pairs of prophe-
cies. This had already been noticed here and there, e.g. in chap. xxi., and it seems
doubtful whether Dr. Cornill's extension of the principle will stand.

1 7, C. A., Introduction, pp. xii-xiv. The reader will at once notice the points in
which I have modified my views.

2 T am aware that Ewald considers chap. xii. to be an insertion of post-Exile origin.
The time of this lyric passage, and its imitative character, seem to have suggested this
view, which is certainly attractive. , ;

3 Amos had already given a series of short decisive oracles on the neighbouring
peoples (i. 3-ii. 3). Zephaniah (ii. 4-15), Jeremiah (xlvi.-li.), and Ezekiel (xxv.-xxxii.)
did so afterwards. : _

4 Whenever xiii. 1-xiv. 23 was inserted, whether in Jsaiah's time or during the
Exile, it had the unfortunate effect of separating x. 5-xii. 6 from its appendix.

188 ESSAYS,

new prophetic work consists of chaps. xxviii—xxxiii.; it seems
chiefly intended as a memorial of the state of the Jews during
Sargon’s intervention in the affairs of Palestine, though a
prophecy of a later period (xxxiii.) was added as an appendix.
lour groups of chapters still remain, viz. xxiv.—xxvii., xxxiv.
and xxxv., XXXVi.-xxxix., and xl.-lxvi. Let me begin with
the third. It consists of an historical narrative in which two
prophecies (xxxvii. 21-35 and xxxix. 5-7) and a poem
(xxxviii. 9-20), the latter ascribed, not to Isaiah, but to
Hezekiah, are imbedded. By whom the narrative was
written, and when, is much disputed (see vol. i. p. 209); but
that the first of the two prophecies is the work of Isaiah is
admitted on all hands, and the analogy of chaps. vii. and xx.
shows that the narrative, long as it is, exists for the sake of
the prophecies, and not the prophecies for the narrative. The
parallel of Jer. lii. suggests further that Isa. xxxvi.-xxxix.
were originally intended as a conclusion or appendix to the
Book of Isaiah.

As to the three other groups, we must first of all separate
chaps. xl.—-Ixvi. the difficulty with regard to which is, not so
much its position, as the arrangement of its contents. Not,
I say, its position, for supposing Isaiah to have written these
chapters, he or his disciple-editor could not well have placed
them anywhere else.! To its internal arrangement I return
presently. There remain chaps. xxiv.-xxvii. and xxxiv,,
xxxv., which must be taken in connection with xiii. 1—xiv. 23.
Why these groups of prophecies received their present position
is certainly not clear at first sight; plausible reasons are all
that can be given. The last-mentioned not unnaturally heads
the series of foreign oracles with its emphatic description of
the day of Jehovah—that day which is always coming anew,
whether Babylon or Assyria, Moab or Philistia, be its most
prominent victim; while the group, chaps. xxiv.—xxvii., not
unsuitably closes it, since the restoration of Israel in which
these prophecies culminate is, in fact, the object of history
as viewed by Jehovah’s prophets. There is also a striking
similarity between the closing verse (xxvii. 13) and the passage
(xi. 11-16) which concludes the predictive portion of the group
xX. 5-xii. 6. As to chaps. xxxiv., xxxv., their wide and com-
prehensive character fully explains their present position at
the end of what we may call the first book or volume of
Isaiah (chaps. xxxvi-xxxix. being regarded as an appendix).
Chap. xxxv., in particular, would commend itself as a finale
to one of the most characteristic feelings of a Jew. We have

1 Chap, xxxix. 6, with its reference to a ‘carrying to Babylon,’ forms a natural link
between the two halves of the book,

ESSAYS. 189

already seen how distressed the Rabbis were by the gloomy
tone of the last verse of chap. Ixvi. On the other hand, such
a comforting word as ‘They shall overtake gladness and joy,
trouble and sighing shall flee away,’ would appear a most
appropriate epilogue to the works of so great a prophet.

2.

With regard to the second part of Isaiah, the writer has
already stated that he cannot see his way to adopt any of
the current arrangements (vol. i. p. 242). The discourse no
doubt makes a fair show of continuity. There are none of
those headings which in the first part so rudely dispel the
dream of homogeneousness, and one can read on for a con-
siderable way without any striking break in the thread of
thought. Besides this, there occurs at equal intervals in the
volume an expression which looks as if it were intended to
mark the close of a book, in the manner of a chorus or
refrain—‘ There is no peace to the ungodly’ (xlviii. 22, lvii.
21), and the closing verse of the last chapter may be regarded
as repeating the idea of this refrain in a new and more
striking form. On this ground, Friedrich Riickert, scholar
as well as poet, suggested in 1831 a division of the prophecy
into three parts, each consisting of nine chapters; and Rue-
tschi, a Swiss scholar, attempted, on this basis, to draw out
the design of the book, and to show that there was a unity,
not only of form, but of subject and of time.!| This view has
met with a large measure of acceptance; it flatters the natural
love of symmetry, and appears to accord with the supposed
fondness of the Jews for the number three (it gives three
books with three times three subdivisions). Voices on the
other side, however, have not been wanting, and chief among
these is Ewald’s, who declares the popularity of Riickert’s
view to be inconceivably perverse.? It is, in fact, too simple,
too mechanical. Had it really the support of the contents,
Riickert, a dilettante student of the prophets, would hardly
have been the first to discover it. Nor are the writers who
hold with him at all at one among themselves as to the
arrangement of the prophecies within the three books.
Naegelsbach, for instance, the latest commentator on Isaiah,
only admits five discourses in the last book, and Prof. Birks
prefers a sevenfold to a ninefold subdivision. Approaching
the book with disenchanted eyes, we see that there is a much

1 Theolog. Studien und Kritiken, 1854, p. 261, &c.

2 So I suppose I may paraphrase the characteristic ‘es ist im guten sinne unbe-
greiflich ‘ (Ewald, Die Prepheten, iii. 29, note 2).

190 ESSAYS.

larger number of interruptions of continuity than Riickert’s
division supposes ; and, while granting the importance of the
division at xlviii. 22, we can attach comparatively little weight
to that at lvii. 21, chap. lvi. 1-8 being closely akin to chap.
Iviii., and even chap. lvii. not so violently separated from the
next chapter by its subject-matter as, for instance, lvi. 8 from
lvi. 9, and chap. Ixii. from chap. xiii, We cannot, indeed,
suppose that the occurrence of the same striking verse at equal
intervals is purely accidental. But may it not be that the
two verses at the end of chap. lvii. were added by an after-
thought to gratify a fondness for external symmetry? that
the original prophecy ended at xlviii. 22,1 and that the re-
mainder of the book grew up by degrees under a less per-
sistent flame of inspiration? This view clearly involves
no disparagement to the spiritual importance of the latter
prophecies, the significance of which stands in no relation to
their technical perfection.

It is the frequency with which the thread of thought is
broken which makes it, in my opinion, so difficult to offer a
satisfactory division of the latter part of Isaiah. Even in
chaps. xl.—-xlviii, which are tolerably coherent, there are
several points at which it is quite uncertain whether or not
we ought to begin a new chapter: this is particularly the
case in chaps. xlii-xlv. To me, indeed, it is tolerably clear
that xliii. r-xliv. 5 forms one section in itself, and xliv. 6-
xlv. 25 another. But when I find Delitzsch connecting xliii.
1-13 with chap. xlii, and Ewald, not only accepting chap.
xliv. as an independent section, but even forming xliv. I-9
into a single paragraph, I am obliged to distrust my own
insight. In the portion beginning at chap. xlix., however, the
difficulties of distribution are much increased. The opening
chapter, no doubt, connects itself with the preceding part by
the obvious parallelism of verses 1-6 with xlii. 1-7, and down
to Jii. 12 (see note below) there is no unusual break in the
continuity. But from lii. 13 to liii. 12 both style and ideas
become strikingly different (see p. 39). It seems to me clear
that, though not discordant with the other passages relative
to the Servant, this obscure and difficult section cannot have
been originally intended to follow chaps. xlix. 1-lii. 12. Let
any plain, untheological reader be called upon to arbitrate ; I
have no doubt as to his decision. And this section does but
introduce a series of still more strikingly disconnected pas-
sages which occur at intervals in the remainder of the book—

1 Chap. lii. r2 has equally the appearance of having been designed as the close

of a book. It would be a plausible conjecture that xlix, 1-lii, 12 was originally meant
as an epilogue,

ESSAYS. 1QI

viz. lvi. 1-8 ; Ivi. Q-Ivii. 21 5! Iviii. 1-lix. 21; Ixiii. 1-6; xiii,
7-Ixiv. ; Ixv.; Ixvi2 The preceding commentary will, I hope,
have proved that these opinions are not thrown out loosely
and at random. But a mere glance is sufficient to show the
wide discordance of tone between chaps. Ix.-Ixii. and the
passages to which I have just referred.

Ill. THE CHRISTIAN ELEMENT IN THE BOOK
OF ISAIAH.

I.

AN essay in apologetic theology is foredoomed to much
adverse criticism : as Herder long ago said, ‘the witness of
the Old Testament for Christ is no simple and overpowering
demonstration; it is based on composite and convergent
evidence, and so delicate and obscure, that to him who doubts
and denies it can prove nothing.’ Still, the effort to express
this witness anew must now be made; it is useless to repeat
what is no longer in harmony with the best knowledge of the
age, Apologetic theology must be reformed, and Biblical
criticism and exegesis have to aid in preparing the ground.
This is the reason why these seeds of thought on the Christian
element in prophecy are once again published, not without
some reluctance, in a philological work. May I add that the
treatment of the Psalms in this essay supplies what some may
have desiderated in my recent literary edition of the Psalter
in the Parchment Library?

An influential modern writer upon the Old Testament,
whose name is now at least as often heard as that of Ewald,
has thought it necessary in the preface to his most considerable
work to defend himself against the charge of arguing points
of criticism upon concealed metaphysical premisses. He ob-
serves in reply® that, if he were to introduce his researches
by an explicit statement of his theory of the universe, he
would make it appear that his critical method and results
are the outcome of his views on theology, and consequently

1 The tone of lvij. rr 3-21 is more in harmony with that of xl.-lii. 12 than the
earlier part of the chapter (see on lvii. 11 a). i
. #2 Tcannot bring myself to believe that chaps. Ixv., Ixvi., in spite of their unde-
niable points of contact, were written continuously, much less (see on Ixv. 1) that they
were intended as a sequel to chap. Ixiv. Even chap. Ixvi. is not as a whole very co-
herent ; compare vv, 1-5 with vv. 6-24.

5 Dr. A. Kuenen, Historisch-kritisch enderzoek naar het ontstaan ... van de
boeken des Ouden Vertonds (Leiden, 186r), vol. i. pp. vii, viii, of the preface.

192 ESSAYS.

of no value to those who do not belong to his own school of
thought. The object of the present work, as has been stated
already, is mainly exegetical, and only indirectly critical ; but
it is, perhaps, for that very reason important to meet the ex-
pectations of any section of its readers with more than usual
frankness. For it is emphatically not a party book, but de-
signed to help as many students as possible to a philologically
sound view of the text, from which they may proceed, if they
are so disposed, to the fruitful investigation of the ulterior
critical problems. Most English books on Isaiah carry their
theological origin on their forefront ; this one can hardly be
said to do so. The same reason which weighed with Dr.
Kuenen has influenced the writer. But as he has not thought
it right to express himself fully in the main body of the
work, he hastens to repair the omission in the supplementary
portion.

‘There is a philological exegesis, and there is a Christian’
(Preface, vol. i.). In what sense this laconic aphorism is
intended, the present essay will show. Its scope, then, is
not polemical. The ‘ strife of tongues’ too often leads to the
‘darkening of counsel,’ and the essays on Biblical subjects
called forth by controversy have seldom been those which
have permanently advanced the sacred interests of truth
After spending even a short time in the heavy air of contro-
versial theology, the student is forced to exclaim with a kin-
dred spirit among the prophets,’ ‘Oh that I had in the wilder-
ness a lodging-place of wayfaring men!’ And if in these
days of toleration he cannot join in the same prophet’s watch-
word, ‘ Fear is on every side, ? yet the misunderstanding and
suspicion which from opposite sides meet the Biblical inves-
tigator may well render him as reluctant to publish on ques-
tions of the day as Jeremiah was to prophesy. Still there is
a worse fate than being misunderstood, and that is to be ‘to
truth a timid friend ;’ and if the conclusions of this essay
should incur the reproach of triteness, yet there may be
something a little new and suggestive in the road by which
they have been reached. For they were certainly as great
a surprise to the writer as any of his results in the critical or
exegetical field, and, as the preceding commentary will have
shown, he belongs to a school of interpretation mainly, at

1 See Jer. ix. 2. Jeremiah was evidently a profound student of the writings of
inspired men, and has, I think, a better title than Ezra to be regarded as the father of
the Soferim (students of Scripture : A. V. ‘ scribes’),

® Jer. vi. 25, Xx. 3, 10, xlvi. 5, xlix. 29, comp. Ps. xxxi. 14. (Hitzig and Ewald
ascribe Ps, xxxi. to Jeremiah. It would, however, be too bold to assert that all pas-
sages with affinities ef ke os were actually written by that prophet, who seems, in
fact, to have been the founder of a school of writers.)

ESSAYS. 193

any rate, composed of rationalists. It is true he has come
to believe in a definitely Christian interpretation of the Old
Testament, but this hé thinks should be based entirely
upon the obvious grammatical meaning. To give even the
slightest stretch to a word or construction in deference to
theological presuppositions, is a fault of which he has an un-
feigned horror. Believing personally in the Virgin-born, he
dares not render a certain famous text in Isaiah, ‘ The virgin
shall conceive ;’ and while accepting the narrative in Matt.
xxvii. 57-60, he scruples to translate another celebrated pas-
sage, ‘ He was with the rich in his death.’

It will perhaps be said that all Biblical expositors are now
agreed in admitting the full supremacy of the grammar and
the lexicon. They are doubtless agreed in theory, but their
practice does not always correspond. I may seem to be un-
necessarily earnest, and even, I fear, discourteous, and I am
eager to proceed to still more interesting matters. But even
this point has a degree of importance, and the evidence for it
cannot be relegated to a footnote. Let me refer, then, to the
two passages quoted above—Isa. vii. 14, lili. 9.!| It is a fact
which I have myself emphatically stated, that the word ‘aliah
is used everywhere else of an unmarried woman. But it is also
a fact that this is only inferred from the context, and there is
nothing in Isa. vii. 14-16 to enable us to determine positively
whether the mother of Immanuel was a married or simply a
marriageable woman. We may, indeed, suspect from the
somewhat remarkable word selected that Isaiah meant to call
attention to the mother; but we cannot venture to go an
inch further. Just as ‘e/em might legitimately be used of a
young man who happened also to be married, so might ‘admah
be used of a young woman who was alsoa wife. It is stretch-
ing language unduly, and converting translation into exegesis,
to exclude this full possibility with such a meagre context as
the prophecy of Immanuel.

With regard to the second passage referred to, a protest is
perhaps still more necessary, because two eminent scholars
(Dr. Delitzsch and Dr. Kay), while rejecting the ungramma-
tical rendering of Vitringa (and Auth. Vers.), continue to
illustrate the passage by quoting Matt. xxvii. 57-60. How
this can be done without a violation of the rules of parallelism,
and an injury to the harmony of the style, it is difficult to
understand (see note p. 49). This, then, appears to be a case
of the involuntary nullification of a rendering by the exegesis,
and reminds us forcibly of the words of Scaliger, ‘Non

1 On the Christian interpretation of these passages, see below.

VOL. II. oO

194 ESSAYS.

aliunde dissidia in religione pendent, quam ab ignoratione
grammaticee.’

I have ventured to use the phrase ‘a definitely Christian
interpretation of the Old Testament.’ I do not thoroughly
like it, any more than I like the distinction between the na-
tural and the supernatural. Both expressions, however con-
venient and for purposes of classification indispensable, are
but provisional to those who have learned ‘to sum up all
things in Christ’ (words which have happily not yet become
a Shibboleth, and which have as profound a philosophical as
religious significance). Everything in the Old Testament
stands in some relation to Christ, whether ‘ definitely’ or not.
Nor is this all. Every revolution of the ancient heathen
world, whether in politics or in thought, is a stage in its
journey towards that central event, which is the fulfilment of
its highest aspirations. Plato speaks almost as if he foresaw
the crucifixion,! and Seneca insists on the historic character
of the ideal wise man, ‘even though within long periods one
only may be found.’? Asan accomplished historical theologian
has well said:

‘ The fact that such a character [as Jesus Christ], so unique,
so divine, should have come into the world, leads us to feel
that there surely must have been in earlier times some shadows
at least, or images, to represent, dimly it may be, to former
generations that great thing which they were not actually to
witness. It would lead us to believe that there must have
been some prophetic voice to announce the future coming of
the Lord, or else the very stones would have cried out.’

But provisionally one must draw a distinction between
some foreshadowings, some prophecies, and others. There
are not, indeed, two Spirits of prophecy, the one for the Gen-
tile, the other for the Jewish world ; but in our present condi-
tion of ignorance it is at least not irrational to maintain that
the ‘ prophetic voices’ which announce the Messiah in the Old
Testament are so definite and distinct, and in such agreement
with history, as to prove that God has in very decd revealed
himself to Israel (not for Israel’s sake alone) in a fuller sense
than to other nations.

It is not, however, everyone who is honestly able to come

1 Plato, De repudl., ii. pp. 361-2. It is just possible that Plato's imaginative pic-
tuve of the sufferings of the righteous man was inspired by the story of Osiris (though
the impoitant detail of the resurrection is wanting); but from a Christian point of
view this most touching story is, in its post-mythic or spiritualised form, an uncon-
scious prophecy of the Gospel. Tertullian, I think, calls our Lord ‘alter Osiris.’

2 Seneca, De constant., c. 7, § 1.

3 Sermon preached in Westminster Abbey by the Very Rev. Dr. Stanley, Christmas

Day, 1879. (Abstract in Datly Telegraph, Dec. 26.) On revising my work, I cannot
kelp adding, Quis desiderio sit pudor aut modus Tam cari capitis ?

ESSAYS. 195

to this conclusion. It depends on one’s moral attitude to-
wards the two great Biblical doctrines summed up in the ex-
pressions ‘the Living God, and ‘the God-man Jesus Christ.’
If you believe heartily in the God of Revelation and of Pro-
vidence, you are irresistibly impelled to a view of the Scrip-
tures, which, though it may be difficult to demonstrate, is
none the less in the highest degree reasonable. It is only
half of your belief that the Biblical writers saw deeper into
spiritual things and spoke more forcibly of what they had
seen than ordinary men. It seems to you the most natural
thing in the world that, at important moments in the history
of God’s people, and at the high-water marks of the inspira-
tion of His prophets, typical personages should have been
raised up, and specially definite prophecies have been uttered.
Not that the laws of human nature were violated, nor that
Christian interpreters are to explain the prophets unphilo-
logically, but that God overruled the actions and words of
His servants, so as to cast a shadow of the coming Christ.
If, again, you believe in the true though ‘veiled’ Divinity of
Jesus Christ, and humbly accept His decrees on all points
essentially connected with His Messiahship, you will feel
loyally anxious to interpret the Old Testament as He beyond
question interpreted it! You will believe His words when
He says (and I attach no special importance to the accuracy
of this particular report of His words, for the idea of it per-
vades all the four Gospels) : ‘The Scriptures are they which
testify of me. You will reply to non-Christian critics, ‘In
spite of modern criticism and exegesis, there must be some
sense in which the words of my Lord are true. He cannot
have mistaken the meaning of His own Bible, the book on
which in His youth and early manhood He nourished His
spiritual life. He who received not the Spirit by measure,
cannot have been fundamentally mistaken in the Messianic
character of psalms and prophecies,’

In short, there are two fixed points with the class of
students here represented : 1. that in order to prepare suscep-
tible minds for the Saviour, a special providential guidance
may be presumed to have been given to the course of certain
selected lives and the utterances of certain inspired person-
ages ; and 2, that this presumption is converted into a certainty
by our Lord’s authoritative interpretation of the Old Testa-
ment. To accept these two fixed points is to many persons

1 Prof. J. E. Carpenter remarks, ‘ This position betrays a confident assurance con-
cerning the views entertained by Jesus upon these passages which we cannot share’
(Modern Review, 1881, p. 250). But allowing for errors as to this or that detail of

Messianic interpretation ascribed to Jesus, can we really be mistaken in assuming that
He did interpret psalms and prophecies Messianically ?

o2

196 ESSAYS.

a very real ‘cross,’ The torrents of ridicule which have been
poured out upon ‘circumstantial fulfilments’ have left a
general impression that they can only be admitted by doing
violence to grammar and context, which to a modern student
is nothing short of ‘plucking out’ his ‘right eye.’ Hence
many ‘liberal’ theologians! have been fain to stunt their re-
ligion in favour, as they suppose, of their philology, and their
example has been followed with less excuse by many who
are guiltless of special study. But must there not be some
mistake both on the side of the cross-bearers and of the cross-
rejecters? Can it be that human nature is ‘divided against
itself,’ and left to choose between intellectual and religious
mutilation? Here at least scepticism is the truest piety. It
is the conviction of the writer that there is a ‘more excellent
way, and that the philological and the Christian interpretation
can be honestly combined, without any unworthy compromise.

2.

The definitely Christian elements in the Old Testament
are mainly (not by any means entirely) of two kinds: 1. fore-
shadowings of special circumstances in the life of Christ,
occurring as 7¢ were casually in the midst of apparently
rhetorical descriptions ; and 2. distinct pictures of Jesus Christ,
the suffering Messiah. It is of the former that I speak at
present. We have a right to expect them, and we, as a
matter of fact, find them. But it must be remembered, in
deference to common sense, that the passages in which they
occur admit of another but a perfectly combinable interpre-
tation. The object of special or circumstantial features in
an Old Testament description is primarily to symbolise the
character of the person or work referred to, and the literal
fulfilment of the clause or verse containing them in some
event of the life of Jesus Christ is a superabundant favour to
those who believe in the Providence of a ‘ Living God.’? For
prophecy has in the first place to do with principles and
broad general characteristics, and only in the second with

1 It isa pleasure to ke able to except F. D, Maurice. Speaking of the attractive-
ness to the Rabbis of the time of Christ of ‘merely incidental’ statements, such as
Mie. v. 2, he observes, ‘I do not see that it was any disparagement to their wisdom
that they recognised a divine order and contrivance even in such circumstances as
these. . . . Devout men welcome such coincidences and recurrences as proofs that
they are under a divine cducation. Why should the like be wanting in a national

story? Why should they not be noted in a took which traces all the parts of it as
the fulfilment of a divine purpose?’ (Prophets and Kings of the Old Testament,
p. 341.) ;

# It has been well said that ‘the prophecy [of Zech. ix. 9] would have been as
truly and really fulfilled if the triumphal procession of Palm Sunday had never taken
place’ (Dr. C. Wright, Bampton Lectures on Zechariah, p. 239).

ESSAYS. 197

details. This caution should be borne in mind to avoid
misunderstanding the sequel.—The spccial foreshadowings
spoken of are exemplified in no portion of the Old Testament
to the same extent as in the Psalms; they relate especially in
this book to scenes or features of the Passion. The following
references have already been given in the New Testament :—

Ps. xxxiv. 20, in John xix. 36 ;

Ps, xli. 9, in John xiii. 18 ;

Ps, xxii, 18,1 in John xix. 24 (ot Matt. xxvii. 35) ;
Ps, Ixix. 10, in Rom. xv. 3 ;

Ps. Ixix. 21, in John xix. 28,

But the Biblical writers have only given us specimens—
the parallelisms are both more numerous and more striking
than might be supposed from these few instances. In Ps,
xXxxv. II, we have a foreshadowing of the false testimony
against Jesus; in Ps. xxii. 7, 8, Ixix. 12, of the revilings ; in
Ps, xxii. 16, of the piercing of the hands and the feet (or, if the
other reading be adopted, the cruel, ‘lion-like’ worrying of
the helpless prey); in Ps. lxix. 21, of the offering of the gall
and vinegar. It should be observed that these parallels are
not such as can be disputed (like some of the Old Testament
references in the Epistles) on the ground of far-fetched
Rabbinic exegesis; they are taken from psalms which, with
one exception,? are, as we shall see presently, in a very strict
sense Messianic, and, in fact, also supply instances of our
second class of prophecies—viz. distinct pictures of the suffer-
ing Messiah. It is of course possible to maintain * that the
whole of the narrative of our Lord’s Passion was suggested
by reminiscences of these passages of the Psalms; but the
conjecture would not be a plausible one, 1. because of the
extreme casualness of the Psalm-parallels,* and 2. because the
whole of the Gospel-narrative, from the beginning of Mat-
thew to the end of John, is pervaded by a parallelism to the
Old Testament. Yet Strauss himself did not suppose that
the whole narrative was a conscious or unconscious fiction on
the basis of Old Testament reminiscences. It may be con-

1 Our Lord Himself regarded the whole psalm as prophetic of Himself, as we must
infer from His utterance of the opening words (Matt. xxvii. 46, Mark xv. 34).

? The exception is of course Ps, xxxiv., which is only Messianic in so far as any
characteristic utterance of a pious sufferer is in the highest degree true of Christ. But
the overruling of Providence is as manifest in the literal fulfilment of John x1x. 36 as
in any other passage of the group.

> Strauss did in fact hold that Psalms xxii. and Ixix., ‘together with the extract
from Isa, liii.," ‘form, as it were, the programme according to which the whole history
of the Crucifixion in our Gospels is drawn up’ (New Life of Fesus, Eng. Transl.,
li. 369).

4 T mean that except in the light of the Gospel-narratives no one would have
thought of regarding these incidental phrases in the Psalms as anticipations of scenes
in the Passion, :

198 ESSAYS.

tended, therefore, that the existence of these circumstantial
prophecies in the Book of Psalms confirms the view that there
are similar circumstantial prophecies in the Book of Isaiah.
That they were conscious prophecies the writer does not sup-
pose, and to many they will only seem accidental coincidences.
It is their amount and quality which give them significance ;
and the full Christian explanation of them as due to Providen-
tial overruling (a ‘pre-established harmony’) is therefore in
sole possession of the field.'

I have ventured to state my belief that the psalms to
which these circumstantial foreshadowings belong are Mes-
sianic. Let me briefly explain my position. There is much
haziness in the minds of most persons as to the meaning of
the words Messiah and Messianic. I have, therefore, first of
all to state in what sense I use these expressions. I think I
am in harmony with the Biblical writers if I define the word
Messiah as meaning one who has received some direct com-
mission from God determining his life’s work, with the single
limitation that the commission must be unique, and must
have a religious character. Thus Cyrus will not be a Messiah,
because ‘his function was merely preparatory ; he was to be
instrumental in the removal of obstacles to the realisation of
[God’s kingdom]’ (7. C. A., p. 166). An individual priest will
not be a Messiah, because he has received no unique personal
commission ; even the High Priest Joshua is only represented
as typical of Him who was to be pre-eminently the Messiah
(Zech. iii. 8). David was a Messiah (compare Ps. xviii. 50),
because he was God’s vicegerent in the government of His
people Israel; the laws which David was to carry out were
not merely secular, but religious, and of Divine appointment.
Each of David’s successors was in like manner theoretically
a Messiah. The people of Israel was theoretically a Messiah,
because specially chosen to show forth an example of
obedience to God’s laws (Ex. xix. 5, 6), and to preach
His religion to the Gentiles (Isa. ii. 3, lv. 5). Above all,
a descendant of David who should take up the ill-performed
functions of his royal ancestors was to be, both in theory
and in fact, the Messiah (Isa. ix. 6, 7, &c.); and so, too, was
the personal Servant of Jehovah (Isa. Ixi. 1), who was both
to redeem His people from their sins,and to lead them in the
performance of their commission.

Hence we may reckon five groups of Messianic psalms :—
I. Psalms which refer to a contemporary Davidic king,
setting him, either directly or by implication, in the light of

1 See Delitzsch, ‘Der Messias als Versbhner,’ Saat auf Hoffnung, 1866, pp. 116-
138, especially p, 136.

ESSAYS. 199

his Messianic mission. II, Those relating to the future ideal
Davidic sovereign, or to a contemporary king idealized into
a Messiah. III. Those which refer to the future glories of
the kingdom of God, but without expressly mentioning any
Messiah. IV. Those which, though seemingly spoken by an
individual, in reality describe the experiences of the Jewish
nation in their unsteady performance of their Messianic com-
mission. V. Those in which, with more or less consistency,
the psalmist dramatically introduces the personal and ideally
perfect ‘Servant of Jehovah’ (to adopt the phrase in Isa. xlii.
&c.) as the speaker.

On the first group there cannot be much difference of
opinion. It contains Psalms xx., xxi, xlv., ci, cxxxii. The
interest of the interpreter is more awakened by the second
group, containing Psalms ii, Ixxii, cx. In Ps. ii. we are
presented first with a picture of the whole world subject to
an Israelitish king, and vainly plotting to throw off the yoke ;
then with the Divine decree assuring universal dominion to
this particular king ; then with an exhortation to the kings
of the earth to submit to Jehovah’s Son.' It is, I know,
commonly supposed that the psalm has a primary reference
to circumstances in the life of David, but the ordinary Chris-
tian instinct seems to me much nearer the truth. Even
granting for the moment that the chiefs of the Syrians and
the Ammonites could be dignified in liturgical poetry with the
title ‘kings of the earth,’ there is not the slightest indication
in 2 Sam. vii. or elsewhere, that a prophet ever conveyed an
offer to David of the sovereignty of the whole world. Even
Jewish tradition, so zealous for the honour of the Davidic lyre,
has not ascribed this psalm to David. Who, then, can the
Son of Jehovah and Lord of the whole earth be but the
future Messiah, whom the prophets describe in such extra-
ordinary terms? Why should we expect the psalms always to
have acontemporary political reference? If one psalmist (see
below) takes for his theme the Messianic glories of Jerusalem,
why may not another adopt for his the glories of the Messiah
himself ?

The same arguments apply to Ps. Ixxii, which a Uni-
tarian divine pronounces ‘the most Messianic in the collection,’
adding that it ‘is applied by Bible readers in general, with-
out hesitation or conscious difficulty, to the Messiah of
Nazareth, as beautifully describing the spirit of his reign.’?
The judgment of the plain reader is not to be lightly dis-

1 The Aramaic day, not admitting the article, suited the unique position of the

personage spoken of. Comp. note in the Parchment Series Psalms, ed. 2.
? Higginson, Ecce Messias, p. 30.

200 ESSAYS.

regarded, and though Mr. Higginson goes on to speak of ‘its
true historic marks, which assign it distinctly to the accession
of Solomon,’ other critics (eg. Hupfeld) altogether deny these,
and the Messianic interpretation has not yet been altogether
refuted. The psalm is not, indeed, a prediction (as King
James’s Bible makes it), but is at any rate a prayer for the
advent of the Prince of peace and of the world, whom the
psalmist in the ardour of hope identified with some Israelitish
king. Ps. cx., again, is as a whole only obscure to those
who will not admit directly Messianic psalms.! How signifi-
cantly the first of the two Divine oracles opens, with an in-
vitation to sit on the throne, ‘high and lifted up’ (Isa. vi. 1),
where the Lord Himself is seated! Can we help thinking of
the ’E7 gibbor in Isaiah (ix. 6), and still more of the ‘one
like ason of man’ who ‘came with the clouds of heaven,
and was ‘brought near before the Ancient of days’ (Dan.
vii. 13)? True, that ‘son of man’ is not said to be a priest,
but he agrees with the personage in the psalm in that he is
conceived of as in heaven, and as waging war and exercising
sovereignty on earth from heaven. Neither in Daniel nor in
the psalm is anything said about the Davidic origin of the
high potentate, but his nature and functions are clearly those
of the Davidic Messiah. The priestly character of the ‘lord’
in Ps. cx. 1 can be fully explained from Zech. iii. 8, vi. 11-13,
where a priestly element in the Messianic functions is dis-
tinctly recognised ; not, however, in a sacrificial sense, but
with regard to a not less characteristic function of the priest,
as the spiritual head and representative of God’s people.”

Over the third group I may pass lightly. It contains
some late psalms, such as xcvi—c., in which the happiness of
being under Jehovah’s personal government is celebrated, and
also Ps. 1xxxvii., in which, chief among the Messianic privi-
leges of Jerusalem, the conversion of the heathen is represented
as their being ‘born again in Zion’ (comp. Isa. xliv. 5).

The fourth contains a number of psalms commonly re-
garded as Davidic, and as typically Messianic, and some
which are merely supposed to describe the sufferings of a
pious individual. In both subdivisions the language is often
hyperbolical, which is explained in the case of the former by
the typical character of the writer, and the overruling influence
of the Spirit. A similar explanation might plausibly be
offered for the seeming hyperboles of the latter subdivision,
for every pious sufferer is in a true sense a type of Jesus

1 Comp. vol. i., p. 62, n. 2.
2 Richm, Alessianic Prophecy, Pp. 202.

ESSAYS. 201

Christ. But it is much simpler to suppose that these psalms
really describe the experiences of the Jewish nation in the
pursuit of its Messianic ideal: the supposed speaker is a per-
sonification. This is no arbitrary conjecture. The Jewish
nation and its divinely appointed ideal were, in fact, to the
later prophets and students of Scripture a familiar subject
of meditation. I need hardly remind the reader of the
‘Servant of Jehovah’ in some parts of II. Isaiah, and of the
striking monologue of the true Israel in Mic. vii. but may be
allowed to state my opinion that one principal object of the
Book of Jonah was to typify the spiritual career of Israel, and
that the so-called Song of Solomon was admitted into the
Canon on the ground that the Bride of the poem symbolised
the chosen people. Can we wonder that some of the psalmists
(as also the author of the third Lamentation) adopted a
similar imaginative figure ?

One of the most remarkable of these psalms is the eigh-
teenth. It is probable enough that the psalmist in writing it had
the life of David in his mind’s eye ; but it would be unreasonable
to suppose that he merely wished to idealise a deceased king,
or even the Davidic family. The world-wide empire claimed
by the supposed speaker, and the analogy of cognate psalms,
are totally opposed to such a hypothesis, But when we con-
sider that the filial relation to God predicated of David as
king in 2 Sam. vii. is also asserted of the Israelitish nation
(Ex, iv. 22, Hos. xi. 1, Ps. Ixxx. 15), and that in Isa, lv. 3-5
the blessings promised to David are assured in perpetuity to
the faithful Israel, it becomes difficult to deny that David may
have been regarded as typical of the nation of Israel —Another
of these psalms is the eighty-ninth, which supplies further
evidence of the typological use of David. The psalmist has
been describing the ruin which has overtaken the Davidic
family, but insensibly passes into a picture of the ruin of the
state, and identifies ‘the reproach of the heels of thine
anointed’ (v. 51) with ‘the reproach of thy servants’ (v. 50).
—Ps. Ixxi. is another important member of this group, as
anyone must admit who will candidly apply this key; see
especially v. 20, where the reading of the Hebrew text is not
‘me,’ but ‘us.’ Perhaps also Ps. cii. may be added. The
expressions in vv, 3-9 are, some of them at least, far too
strong for an individual, whereas in the mouth of the perso-
nified people they are not inappropriate. The words in v. 23
‘he hath shortened my days’ (virtually retracted in v. 28)
remind us of Ps. Ixxxix. 45 ; and those in the parallel clause,
‘he hath weakened my strength in the way,’ are perhaps an
allusion to the ‘travail in the way’ of the Israelites in the

202 ESSAYS.

wilderness (Ex. xviii. 8), There are some reasons, however,
for rather placing this psalm in the next group.

The remaining members of the fourth group are the so-
called imprecatory psalms! (e.g. v., xxxv., xl. lv., lviii., Lxix.,
cix.). As long as these are interpreted of an individual
Israelite, they seem strangely inconsistent with the injunctions
to benevolence with which the Old Testament is interspersed.?
If, however, they are spoken in the name of the nation—
‘Jehovah's Son,’ their intensity of feeling becomes intelligible.
Certainly it was not ‘ obstinate virulence and morbid morose-
ness’ which inspired them, for ‘each of the psalms in which
the strongest imprecatory passages are found contains also
gentle undertones, breathings of beneficent love. Thus,
“When they were sick, I humbled my soul with fasting ; I
behaved myself as though it had been my friend or brother.”
“When I wept and chastened my soul with fasting, that was
to my reproach.” “They have rewarded me evil for good,
and hatred for my love!”’? And, ‘ finally in the most awful of
these psalms, the denunciations die away into a strain which,
in the original, falls upon a modern ear with something of
the cadence of pathetic rhyme (v'/ibbe khaldl Dhirbéé, “and
my heart is pierced through within me”). 4

Among the psalms not ascribed to David which belong
to this group is the forty-first, from which a quotation is made
in a Messianic sense in John xiii. 18. It is only the people
of Israel which can at once confess its former sins (v. 4),
and appeal to its present ‘integrity’ (v. 12)—The fifth and
last group marks the highest level attained by the inspired
poets. It contains (see note! below), Ps. xxii, xxxv., xl,
lv., Ixix., cii. I cannot think that the persistency of the
traditional interpretation, at any rate as regards the two first
of these psalms, is wholly due to theological prepossessions,
In some of its details, the traditional Christian interpretation
is no doubt critically untenable, but in essentials it seems to
me truer than any of the current literary theories. Let me
briefly refer to the twenty-second psalm, which presents such
striking affinities with II. Isaiah. In two respects it is distin-
guished from most others of the same group ; it contains no
imprecations and no confession of sinfulness. It falls into
two parts. The first and longer of these is a pathetic appeal

1 Some of these psalms, however (xxxv., xl., lv., lxix.), belong more properly to
the fifth group.

2 Ex. xxiii. 4, 5; Lev. xix. 18; Prov. xx. 22, xxiv. 17, 18, 29, XXv. 21, 22, comp.
Job. XxXxi. 29, 30.

3 Bishop Alexander, Bampton Lectures on the Psalms, 1876, p. 53 (Ps. XXxxv. 13,
Ixix, 10, 11; Cix. 4, 5).

4 /bid,, p. 57. (It is not necessary to assume that the faithless friends in Ps. xxxv.,
lv,, are mere figures of specch.)

ESSAYS. 203

to Jehovah from the lowest depth of affliction. The speaker
has been God’s servant from the beginning (vv. 9, 10), yet
he is now conscious of being God-forsaken (v. 1). Not only
are his physical sufferings extreme (vv. 14-17), but he is the
butt of scoffers and a public laughing-stock (vv. 6, 7). Who
his enemies are—whether heathen oppressors or unbelieving
Israelites—is not here stated; but from a parallel passage
(Ps. lxix. 8) it is clear that the hostility arises, partly at least,
from the sufferer’s fellow-countrymen. Only after long
wrestling with God does the psalmist attain the confidence
that he has been heard of Him (v, 21). At this point the
tone suddenly changes. The prayer becomes a joyous
declaration of the answer which has been vouchsafed, and a
promise of thank-offerings. ‘But he does not end there.
He treats his deliverance as a matter of national congratula-
tion, and a cause of more than national blessings. He not
only calls upon his fellow-countrymen to join him in his
thanksgiving (v. 23), but breaks out into an announcement
which draws the whole world within the sphere of his triumph
(vv. 27, 28, 31). 1 I need not stay to point out how unsuitable
is language of this description to any of the Israelites men-
tioned in the Old Testament, and how unnatural it is that
the establishment of God’s universal kingdom should be
placed in sequerice to the deliverance of an individual sufferer.”
The difficulties are strikingly analogous to those which mee-
us in II. Isaiah. There, as here, some features of the det
scription seem to compel us to explain them of an individual
Israelite, while others remain unintelligible unless referred in
some way to the people of Israel, with its Messianic,‘ mission-
ary functions. There, as here, the deliverance of the sufferer
has a vital influence on the spiritual life, first of all of his own
pcople, and then of all mankind. There, as here, the newly-
acquired spiritual blessings are described under the figure of
a feast. Is it so very bold to explain Ps. xxii. and the psalms
like it as utterances of that ideal and yet most real personage,

1 Maitland, The Argument from Prophecy (S.P.C.K.), pp. 95, 96.

2 Hupfeld, I know, denies that the anticipations expressed in vv. 27-31 stand in
any relation to the deliverance of the speaker. But by this denial he destroys the
unity of plan of the poem ; it is certain, too, that the later O. T. writers often con-
nect the conversion of the heathen with the sight of the wonderful deliverance of
Israel. And the very connection which Hupfeld denies in Ps. xxii., he grants in the
parallel passage in Ps. cii. (vv. 15-17).

3 It would be instructive to make out a list of the numerous parallels in these
psalms to II. Isaiah and the Book of Job (for the author of Job, as we have seen, is
not without flashes of Gospel light). “Comp. for instance, Ps. xxii. 6, ‘I am a worm,’
with Isa. xli. 14, Job xxv. 6; zééd¢. ‘and no man,’ with Isa. lii. 14, lili. 2; 2béd. ‘de-
spised of people,” with Isa. xlix. 7; vv. 16, 17, with Job's descriptions of his sickness ;
vv. 26, 28 with Isa. lv. 1, 21. Vv. 27-29 also find their best commentary in Isa. lii.

14, 15.
4 On the sense of the word Messianic, sce above, p. 198

204 ESSAYS.

who in II. Isaiah is the fruit, from one point of view, no doubt,
of special revelation, but from another equally justified and
perfectly consistent with the former, of an intense longing for -
the fulfilment of Israel’s ideal? To assume that both the
sacred poets and the poet-prophet are feeling their way (not,
however, at random) to the presence of the Redeemer? That
they have abandoned the hope of an earthly King of Israel,
and are conscious, too, that even the noblest members of the
nation are inadequate to the Messianic functions? And that
hence they throw out in colossal outlines an indistinct because
imaginatively expressed conception of One who shall perfectly
fulfil these functions for and with his people ?

The above is but a bare statement of results, which, what-
ever be their intrinsic value, may claim a certain degree of
attention on account of the process by which they were gained.
It is not often that a Saul, in searching for his father’s asses,
finds a kingdom. The object of the special study, of which
these results are the principal fruit, was the composition of
a chapter in a literary history of the Old Testament. It now
appears to the author that they supply a sound basis for the
‘Christian interpretation’ at any rate of the Psalter ; but this
is entirely an after-thought. That there is a mysterious + in
this wonderful book became clear to the author from a purely
literary point of view. Applying the key furnished by the
Christian theory, he then found himself in a position to ex-
plain this mystery, and was further enabled to rediscover those
peculiar, circumstantial prophecies which are so natural and
intelligible upon the Christian presuppositions.

ce

Such being the case with the Psalter, are we not justified
in expecting corresponding phenomena in the Book of Isaiah,
viz. I. foreshadowings of special circumstances in the life of
our Saviour; and 2. distinct pictures of Jesus Christ, the
suffering Messiah? We may for our present purpose leave
on one side the question whether or not this book is of com-
posite origin. It is at any rate a very comprehensive work,
by no means limited to the thoughts and prospects of the
age of Isaiah. Indeed, it may be called a text-book of pro-
phetic religion, and strange would it be if belief in the
Messiah were the only dumb note in its scale.

The foreshadowings of special events in the life of Christ
pointed out in the Book of Isaiah by New Testament writers,
are even fewer in number than those in the Psalms. I pass

ESSAYS. 205

over the general reference in Acts viii. 27-35, and confine
myself to the following :—

Isa. vii. 14, Matt. i. 23 ;

Isa. ix. 1, 2, Matt. iv. 15, 163

Isa. lili. 4, Matt. viii. 17 ;

Isa. liii. 12 (fourth clause), Luke xxii. 37.

To these are added by the higher exegesis! 1. 6, liii. 5 (first
clause), liii.9, and the last clause of liii. 12—added, we can
hardly doubt, in the spirit of the apostolic age, which, as the
use of wats in Acts iii. 13, 26, iv. 27, 30, shows, interpreted
the ‘Servant’ to mean Jesus Christ. Let me touch upon
each of these passages. :

(a) Isa. vii. 14.— It is true that the sign given to Ahaz
consists chiefly in the name and fortunes of the child Imma-
nuel, but the mother is not to be left entirely out of account ?
(see note ad /oc.). Isaiah’s ‘dim intuition’ of something re-
markable in the circumstances of the mother may, from a
Christian point of view, be ascribed to the ‘Spirit of Christ
which was in’ the prophet (1 Pet. i. 11). This, to many
minds, will be one part of the unexpected ‘pre-established
harmony’ between the verbal form of the prophecy and its
fulfilment. Another part, less open of course to objection, is
the prophetic significance of the child’s name. Isaiah and
Ahaz may have understood it to mean simply ‘God is on
our side ;’ but the fulfilment in the Person of Jesus Christ
revealed a depth of meaning which Isaiah (though with
’El gibbor, ‘God-the-Mighty-One, before us in Isa. ix. 6, we
should speak hesitatingly) did not probably suspect.

(4) Isa. ix. 1, 2.—It is most remarkable (and might at
first sight justify a suspicion of interpolation) that Isaiah, a
man of Judah, should have delivered this exuberant promise
to the border-districts of Israel, especially as their inhabitants
had most likely approximated more to heathenism than those
of the rest of Israel. The coincidence with the circumstances
of Jesus Christ is too remarkable to be explained away. The
Jews certainly inferred from this passage of Isaiah that the
Messiah would appear in Galilee.’

(c) Isa. liii. 4—This is applied by the evangelist to the
healing ministry of our Lord. It is a purely verbal applica-

1 If we admit the phrases ‘higher’ and ‘lower criticism,’ why not also ‘higher’ and
‘lower exegesis’? By ‘ higher exegesis’ I understand one which ‘interprets prophecy
in the light of fulfilment, and develops the germs of doctrine ina New Testament
sense’ (Preface to vol. i.).

2 T admit an error of judgment in 7. C. A., p. 31. .

3 Eisenmenger, Entdecktes fudenthum, ii. 747. Delitzsch also refers to Léteratur-
blatt des Orients, 1843, col. 776.

206 ESSAYS.

tion, with no support in the context, of the prophecy (comp,
Weiss on Matt. 2. ¢), and therefore stands far below the other
evangelical interpretations referred to.

(@) Isa. liii. 12 (fourth clause).—The prophet merely meant
that the Servant of Jehovah was regarded as a transgressor ;
but by a providentially ‘ pre-established harmony’ the coinci-
dence with facts is even literally exact. I do not, however,
claim the authority of our Lord for the application of the
prophecy ; the whole context in St. Luke is uncertain, see
Mark xiv. 26.

(e) Isa. 1. 6.—There is surely an unsought parallelism
between prophecy and gospel-narrative.

(/) Isa. liii. 5 (first clause).—The context shows that by
‘pierced’ the prophet intended to signify a violent death
accompanied by torture. As Vitringa remarks, ‘there is no
word in Hebrew which can more appropriately be referred to
the torture of the cross of Christ.’

(g) Isa. lili. 9.—The evangelical narrative corresponds
with the prophecy, however we interpret some words of this
verse. But there is absolutely no philological ground for
applying the second clause to the burial of Christ in the tomb
of Joseph. As Dr. Weir remarks, ‘It would, indeed, be
scarcely consistent with the spirit of the Bible, which makes
little account of the mere possession of riches, to give
prominence in the prophetic page to the circumstance of
Christ’s being buried in a rich man’s grave. Surely it added
nothing to the glory of the Saviour to have his body en-
tombed in Joseph’s sepulchre; it was a high honour to
Joseph that he was privileged to supply a resting-place for
the body of Jesus; but surely it did not add to the honour of
Jesus to lic in the rich man’s tomb.’ I need not repeat what
I have said above on the inconsistency into which some
eminent expositors appear to have fallen. Those who, like
Stier, appeal to the singular ‘rich man’ in the second clause,
as indicating Joseph of Arimathea, forget that the alter-
nation of numbers is a characteristic Hebrew idiom (comp.
Isa. x. 4).

(%) Isa. liii. 12 (last clause).—This is one of the passages
which, from an evangelical point of view, place Isa. liii. as
much above Ps. xxii, as that psalm, owing to its complete
freedom from imprecations, is (as it may seem to us in some
of our moods) above Ps. Ixix. It received a fulfilment of
which the prophet could never have dreamed in Luke xxiii. 33.

Let us now turn to the other group of passages in Isaiah,
containing a distinctly Christian element, viz. the portraits of
the teaching, suffering, but in and through his suffering trium-

ESSAYS. 207

phant Messiah (xlii. 1-7, xlix. 1-6, l. 4-9, lit. 13-liii. 12). No
greater problem, whether we regard its intrinsic difficulty or
the importance of its issues, is presented to the Old Testa-
ment interpreter than that of explaining these wonderful
passages. Their difficulty arises partly from the abruptness
with which they are introduced, partly from the apparent in-
consistency of some of the expressions, partly (if we may
judge from the efforts of some to explain it away) from the
extraordinary distinctness with which the most striking ot
them at any rate prefigure the life of Jesus Christ. Let us
first of all clearly understand the alternatives set before us.
(2) It is one source of difficulty, that the portrait-passages
are introduced abruptly. (There is an analogy for this, how-
ever, in the abruptness of the two earliest Messianic pro-
phecies in chaps. vii. and ix.). The alternatives in this case
are to suppose (1) that these passages are based on extracts
from a separate work, which, perhaps, contained a spiritualised
biography of the great martyr-prophet, Jeremiah; and (2)
that the prophetic writer is carried beyond himself by a spe-
cially strong inspiration of the ‘ Spirit of Christ.’ The former
alternative is proposed by Dr. Duhm, of Gottingen.’ The
theory partly agrees with that of Ewald, according to whom
xl. 1, 2, lii.13-liv. 12, lvi. g-lvii. 11, were taken from an earlier
prophet, but the difference is sufficient to allow us to quote
Ewald’s authority as opposed to the view of Dr. Duhm.
The objections to the latter are (1) stylistic (how, eg., can
xlii. 1-6 be ascribed to a different author from the rest of the
prophecy ?) ; and (2) that the theory makes the prophet re-
sponsible for gratuitously misleading his readers. (6) It is
also said that some of the expressions used of the Servant
are inconsistent. This may be explained, 1. on the quota-
tion-theory just mentioned ; 2. as due to a haziness in the
author's conception of the Servant (a view unfavourable to his
poetic vigour, and not to be adopted without compulsion), or
3.0n a subtle but beautiful and (as it seems to me) well-sup-
ported theory to be mentioned presently. (c) Another source
of difficulty to some minds is the extraordinary resemblance
of the description to the Person of Jesus Christ. Here, again,
we have our choice of alternatives. (1) We may say with Mr.
Matthew Arnold, that this harmony between II. Isaiah and
the Gospels is perfectly natural. ‘To a delicate and penetrat-
ing criticism it has long been manifest that the chief literal
fulfilment by Christ of things said by the prophets was
the fulfilment such as would naturally be given by one who
nourished his spirit on the prophets and on living and acting
1 Duhm, Dee Theologie der Propheten (Bonn, 1875), p. 289.

208 ESSAYS.

their words.’! Or (2) we may hold that the Divine Spirit
overruled in such a way the mental process of the prophet
that he chose expressions which, while completely conveying
his own meaning, also corresponded to a future fact in the life
of Jesus Christ. This does not exclude us from searching
for a point of contact in the prophet’s consciousness, and such,
I think, it will be possible to find. Nor does it prevent us
from accepting thankfully the element of truth in Mr. Matthew
Arnold’s too self-eulogistic observation, The harmony be-
tween Isaiah and the Gospels is, in fact, perfectly natural.
But it is also perfectly unique, and what is unique may in one
very good sense be called supernatural. And so we come
round again to the judgment of the plain reader, that the
hand of God is in this extraordinary correspondence, and as
we read the chapter afresh we are conscious of something of
the impression which it produced upon the Earl of Rochester,
whose vivid language is traceable in his biographer’s report.
‘He said to me,’ says Bishop Burnet, ‘that, as he heard it
read, he felt an inward force upon him, which did so enlighten
his mind, and convince him, that he could resist it no longer:
for the words had an authority, which did shoot like rays or
beams, in his mind; so that he was convinced, not only by the
reasonings he had about it, which satisfied his understanding,
but by a power which did so effectually constrain him, that
he did, ever after, as firmly believe in his Saviour, as if he had
seen him in the clouds.’

4.

With this striking confession, with which nothing need
prevent even a philologist from agreeing, it would be natural
to close this essay. Definitely Christian elements of the two
principal kinds mentioned above have, it is believed, been
found, without any injury either to common sense or to lite-
rary exegesis, in the noblest of all the prophetic books. But
a few remarks seem at any rate expedient on what may be
called the secondary Christian elements in the book of Isaiah
—secondary, only so far as they relate to doctrines, and not
to material, objective facts in the life of the Saviour. To
treat these fully would require a peculiar spiritual yapsopa,
not to mention the heavy demand which it would make on
the remaining space. Stier, with all his faults, still deserves
a most honourable place among Christian interpreters for the

1 Arnold, Literature and Dogma (Lond., 1873), p. 114.

2 Some suggestions in aid of this are given in the Essay on the Servant of

Jebovah,
5 Burnet's life of John Marl of Rochester (Lives and Characters, ed. Jebb, p.

229),

ESSAYS, 209

spiritual insight with which he has treated this department of
exegesis, and tu his important work I provisionally refer the
reader. Two of these ‘secondary’ Christian elements, how-
ever, imperatively require to be noticed.

(a) First, the divinity of the Messiah (I take the word
Messiah in an enlarged sense, thus including the truths em-
bodied in the Messianic king, and in the personal ‘ Servant of
Jehovah’). Both parts of Isaiah give us to understand clearly
(and not as a mere tzrévora) that the agent of Jehovah in the
work of government and redemption is himself divine. Not,
indeed, the much-vexed passage in iv. 2, where, even if the
date of this prophecy allowed us to suppose an allusion to
the Messiah, ‘sprout of Jehovah’ is much too vague a phrase
to be a synonym for ‘God’s Only-begotten Son. But the
not less famous ’E£/ gibddér in ix. 6 may and must still be
quoted. As Hengstenberg remarks, it ‘can only signify God-
Hero, a Hero who is infinitely exalted above all human heroes
by the circumstance that he is God. To the attempts at
weakening the import of the name, the passage x. 21’ [where
El gibbor is used of Jehovah] ‘appears a very inconvenient
obstacle”! And who can doubt that, granting the subject of
chap. liii. to be an individual, he must be an incarnation of
the Divine? That such a conception—such a revelation—was
not opposed to primitive religious beliefs has been already
pointed out in the notes on ix. 6, xiv. 14.

(4) Next, Vicarious Atonement. It is not surprising that
most of those who deny the personal Servant are unwilling to
allow the presence of this doctrine in Isa. liii? Yet in itself
it cannot be regarded as an unexpected phenomenon, nor
ought it to be described as a ‘heathenish idea” As Oehler
has well observed, ‘That the intercession of the righteous for
a sinful nation is effectual, is a thought running through the
entire Old Testament, from Gen. xviii. 23 sgg.and Ex. xxxii.
32 sgg. (comp. Ps. cvi. 23, and subsequently Amos vii. I sg¢.)
onwards. And though no doubt it is also stated ‘that
guilt may reach a height at which God will no longer accept
the intercession of His servants’ (Jer. xv. I, comp. xi. 14),
yet this is not inconsistent with the idea of Vicarious Atone-
ment, as even Christians understand it, and in chap. liii., the
blessings promised by the Servant (whatever we understand

1 Christology of the Old Testament, iii. 88.

2 In ZC. A., p. 191, I fully admitted this idea, but my inadequate explanation of
‘the Servant’ compelled me to give the vicariousness an artificial turn. For a survey
of the interpretations opposed to the full Christian one, see V. F. Oebler, Der Knecht
Fehova's im Deuterojesaia, ii. 66-136. To the list might now be added Riehm’s, in
his Messianic Prophecy (Eng. Transl.), p. 147, and Albrecht Ritschl’s, in his Le

christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung, &c., ii. 64, 65.
3 Oehler, Old Testament Theology (Eng. Transl.), il. 425.

VOL, II. P

210 ESSAYS.

them to be) are not promised unconditionally to every member
of the community.' Now, intercession is one form of substi-
tution. But there was another and a more striking form of
it constantly before the eyes of the Israelites in their sacrifices,
whether the taking of life was involved in them or not, for
the offerer was represented ® by his offering. And so the way
was prepared for the revelation (comp. Isa. liii.) of One to
whom a prohibition like that addressed to Jeremiah could not
apply, because He was not only perfectly righteous Himself,
but able, by uniting them mystically to Himself, to ‘make
the many righteous ;’ of One whose sacrifice of Himself was
so precious that it could be accepted even for a people which
had deliberately broken its covenant with Jehovah, and which
therefore was legally liable to the punishment of extermina-
tion. (Here the conception implied, as it would seem, by the
prophet passes, strictly speaking, beyond the range of the
sacrificial ideas of the Old Testament. For the law recog-
nised no sacrifice for deliberate violations of the covenant.
Be it remembered, however, that even chap. liii.and the lead-
ing New Testament writers make a distinction among those
who are equally liable to the legal sentence of death ; some,
though rebels, are at least susceptible of penitence.) It is true
that none of the other foreshadowings of Christ contain this
characteristically (though not exclusively) Christian element
of Vicarious Atonement. But that constitutes no reason why
it should not occur once. In fact, it is really necessary that
it should occur somewhere, to explain that wonderful psalm
which, next to Isa. liii, contains the clearest anticipation of
Jesus Christ in the Old Testament, for there is a gap between
the former and the latter part of Ps. xxii, which can only
be filled up by assuming the Vicarious Atonement from Isa.
liii. The writer of the psalm foresaw, as it were in a vision,
the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow, but
it was not revealed to him how those sufferings produced
so immense a result. His spiritual intuitions were true, but

1 See commentary on liii. 11 (‘ the many’).

2 In every case of a sacrifice (whether with or without shedding of blood) there is
representation (or, using the word lvosely, ‘substitution'). But we must carefully
guard against an error of the older divines, viz. that when a victim was put to death, it
was as a Substitute for the penal death of the sacrificer. This view is now generally
abandoned by Old Testament scholars. The truth is that the blood, according to
the Hebrew conception, is the vehicle of the ‘soul’ (Lev. xvii. 11), and the shedding of
the blood of the victim signifies the offering of its life in place of the life of him who
offers it. The pure ‘soul’ of the victim ‘covers’ (455) or atones for the impure

‘soul’ of the offerer ; the innocence of the one neutralises the sin of the other. (It
must be remembered, however, that the verb in question sometimes has for its subject
Naa especially in the Psalms; God ‘covers’ or cancels sin, without our being told
how this is possible.)

ESSAYS. 211

limited. But the prophet of the Servant of Jehovah saw
further, and it is upon this ground especially that he has been
rightly called an Evangelist before the Gospel.

IV. THE SERVANT OF JEHOVAH.
I.

WHo has not heard of ‘one of the great results of German
criticism ’ that the personage called the ‘ Servant of Jehovah’
is not really an individual at all, but a collective term for the
Jewish people? And that the view which formerly prevailed
was due to a theological prejudice in favour of orthodox
Christianity? Such at least is the form in which popular
writers set forth this ‘result, though their teachers at any
rate are too learned to maintain the second, contrary to the
notorious facts of early Jewish exegesis.! Now Strauss and
Dr. Kuenen (whose names may in the present context with-
out offence be combined) are both extremely able critics,
but both, as it seems to me, more skilful in the analysis of
composite literary works than in fellow-feeling (Wachempfind-
ung, to borrow an expressive German word) for the imagi-
native conceptions of great poets, The facts, in the lan-
guage of a Review not usually favourable to orthodoxy, may
be briefly stated thus :—‘“ The Servant of Yahveh ” is, at
least sometimes, a collective term for the people of Israel.
He is, however, at other times described in language quite
unsuitable to a body of persons. The Christian view’ [in
its crudest form, which rejects points of contact for revelation
in the consciousness of the prophets] ‘is opposed to the
analogy of Hebrew prophecy. What third theory is open ?’?
The ‘ Westminster Reviewer’ here complains of ‘liberal critics’
for ‘not baving given enough attention to the phenomena
which partly prevent a more general acceptance of their own
views. He charitably conjectures that there is something in
the opposition of conservative critics besides theological re-
pulsion, viz. a sense that the ‘collective’ theory does not do
justice to the most salient and impressive passages devoted to
‘the Servant. And does not this suggest the real point of
difference between the two sides, viz. that Dr. Kuenen starts
from the passages in which the conception of ‘the Servant ’

1 Strauss, Mew Life of Fesus, Eng. Transl., i. 314-8; Kuenen, The Prophets and
Prophzcy in Israel, pp. 221-2. Comp. Neubauer and Driver, The Fewish Interpreters
of Isaiah titi,

2 Westminster Review, Oct. 1875, Pp. 475+
P2

212 ESSAYS.

is least developed, and conservative critics from the highest
points which the prophet’s poetic intuition (not to speak
theologically) has reached? And is it not fairer to estimate
a poet’s ideas rather by their strongest than by their weakest
expression—rather by the passages in which he has fully
found his voice, than by those in which he is still labouring
after fitting accents ?

The exegetical facts have been sufficiently laid before the
reader in the preceding commentary. It has, I hope, been
shown that ‘the Servant’ is neither exclusively the people of
Israel as a whole, nor the pious portion of it, nor the class
of prophets, nor any single individual, but that some form of
conception must be found which does justice to the elements
of truth contained in all these theories. In my earlier work!
I was captivated by an extremely tempting theory of Ewald,
which has hardly met with the attention which it deserves.
‘ Sometimes,’ I said, ‘the prophet views the people of Israel
from an ideal, sometimes from an historical point of view.
Hence in several important sections the “ Servant of Jeho-
vah” (like the Zion of xl. 9, &c.) is a purely poetical figure,
personifying the ideal character of the pious Israelite,
and decorated by the prophet with all the noblest achieve-
ments of faith, whether actually realised in the past, or merely
hoped for from the future’ (7.C. 4.,p.155). This theory does
not exclude the possibility that some features in the descrip-
tion may have been taken from individual righteous men (such
as Jeremiah), just as Dante in his pilgrimage through the
unseen world is at once a banished Florentine and the repre-
sentative of humanity ; and as Calderon’s Philotea is said to
be sometimes the ideal of the Church, and sometimes a single
soul. But I erred, and Ewald erred, in regarding this per-
sonage as a ‘purely poetical figure.’ The truth in the theory
is, that ‘the Servant’ does in reality embody the highest
qualities of the Israelite—he is not merely a collective term.
But the truth which it has entirely missed is, that the prophet
actually sees as it were in vision (such is the strength of his
faith) the advent of such an ideal Israelite. And one whole
side of the difficulty connected with the Servant it has left out
of view, viz. the application of the very same term to the
actual people of Israel. Well may the ‘ Westminster Re-
viewer’ call out for some fresh theory to reconcile the
apparently conflicting phenomena !

1 A complete retractation of the writer's former opinions might justly expose him to
the charge of instability, But in his present view he hopes to retain the element of
truth in his former position. -The most widely known living commentator on Isaiah
(Dr. Delitzsch) has himself not always held his present theory, See above, p. 40

ESSAYS. PB ie

I believe myself that the theory of Delitzsch and Ochler
(see vol. i. p. 264) meets the requirements of the case; but
that it admits of a fuller and more complete justification than
those eminent scholars have supplied. I reached it myself
from the starting-point of the fragment of truth taught me
by Ewald. Let me attempt to explain the course of my
thought.——1. The truth in Ewald’s theory (as I ventured to
state above) is, that ‘the Servant’ in the finest and therefore
regulative passages does really embody the highest Israclitish
ideal. We Aryans of the West are accustomed to drawa
hard and fast line between the ideal and the real; but the
unphilosophical Israelite made no such distinction. The
kingdom of God he regarded as really in heaven, waiting to
be revealed; and so the ideal of Israel was to an Israelite
really in heaven, in the super-sensible world, waiting for its
manifestation. But in order to be real, this ideal must at the
same time be personal. This is one important element in
the solution of our question. 2. Next let us consider the
state of mind of the Jewish exiles, for whom (as all agree)
chaps. xl.-Ixvi. of Isaiah were (mainly, at any rate) written.
During the interruption of the ceremonial system they felt
the want of a more spiritual type of religion, and above all
of a new ideal, high enough for veneration, but not too high
to be imitated. They belonged, as we have seen, to an ima-
ginative race, prone to symbolism, and averse to abstract con-
ceptions. One of their number, less absorbed than some in
the national traditions,! and not without some flashes of the
light of the Gospel, produced a wonderfully striking type of
character, divested of everything Israelitish in appearance, into
which he flung in profuse abundance the new divinely-inspired
thoughts which were craving for utterance. The result (as
after long thought I have satisfied myself) was the poem of
Job, in which Job is the type of the ideal righteous man,
‘made perfect through suffering.’ But there were others who,
with all their admiration for Job, retained an overpowering
interest in the national institutions. One of these was a
prophet, for the author of the 4oth and following chapters of
the Book of Isaiah, as all will agree, either is one of the
Jewish exiles, or (to use the language of Delitzsch) ‘ leads a life
in the spirit among the exiles,’ reaching in the power of the
Spirit across the centuries to the contemporaries of the author
of Job. Others were psalmists ; for it must, as we have seen,
be admitted, that some at least of the psalms refer, not to an

1 That the publication of the ‘Book of the Law’ by Ezra presupposes a long

study of the Pentateuchal (or Hexateuchal) narratives and laws, and a band of paticnt
students, all critics will probably agree.

214 ESSAYS.

historical individual, but (in different shades of the concep-
tion) to an ideal and yet (in the psalmist’s mind) real repre-
sentative of the people of Israel. 3. Here I come to the
point where I have felt obliged to diverge from Ewald. These
devout and inspired men were acutely sensible of the incom-
petency of the actual Israel for the embodiment of the newly
revealed ideal. They felt that, if expressed at all, it must be
through a person; and the longings which they felt for the
appearance of such a person, and their faith that Jehovah had
not deserted his people, prepared their minds for a special
revelation that such a Person would appear. Only it was not
in a definite prediction that their newly attained conviction
found expression. Theirs was rather a presentiment (A/nung)
than a clear view of the future, and hence a certain vagueness
in it, which, however, almost if not quite disappears at the
two highest points of the Old Testament revelation, Psalm
xxii. and Isaiah liii. It was not, therefore (as I once thought),
the ideal and yet real Genius of Israel, who preached to an
unbelieving generation, who was slain but not given up to the
power of Hades, and for whom an endless life and a posterity
were reserved—but a literal human being perfectly righteous
himself, and able therefore to ‘make the many righteous.’
Thus much to account for the assertion that in the more
salient and elaborate passages (xlii. I-7, xlix. I-9, 1. 4-10,
lii. 13-liii. 12) the ‘ Servant of Jehovah ’ embodies a presenti-
ment of the historical Redeemer of Israel and the world. I
am not without hope that the difficulty felt by some in con-
ceiving of such a surpassing revelation may have been
relieved by showing the point of contact for it in the mind
of the prophet. The remaining portion of the theory of
Delitzsch and Oehler does not seem to require a lengthened
justification. In xlii. 19 and xliii. 10 the ‘Servant’ is evi-
dently the people of Israel as a whole; while in xli. 8, 9,
xliv. I, 2, 21, xlv. 4, and xlviii. 20, it is the kernel of the
nation, the spiritual Israel.!- No doubt ‘ Servant of Jehovah’
was a common prophetic title for the people of Israel, and
the sublime interpretation given to it sometimes in chaps.
xlii.-liii. is superimposed upon this. It was the fact that
Israel did not act up to his title ‘Servant of Jehovah,’ which
filled the pious exiles with a longing for a person? who

' Dr, A. B, Davidson objects to this way of stating the case (Zx/ositor, 1884, Pp.
93), but how else can the difference in the prophet's language be accounted for ?
Besides, there is a mass of evidence in the Psalms that religious writers did abstract
from the notion of the phenomenal Israel, and form the new idea of the Israel according
to the Spirit—Jeshurun—the ‘assembly of the upright’ (Ps. exi. 1).

2 Elsewhere Dr. Davidson remarks that ‘it may be safely said that if this prophet
was himself a contemporary of the Exile, he cannot have meant by the Servant an
individual’ (Academy, Aug, 25, 1883, p. 125). But this is pure dogmatism. The

ESSAYS. 215

should realise it, and by redeeming the Israelites from their
sins enable them to realise it likewise. Difficult it was of
course to imagine how such a redeemer could arise. ‘Oh
for a clean among the unclean!’ cried mournfully one of the
inspired writers among the exiles (Job xiv. 4). Yet he must
be ‘bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh ;’ else how can
he offer himself a sacrifice for us, and be our teacher? The
prophet in Isa. liii. leaves the solution of the problem to God ;
he trusts Him who cannot abandon His people to produce
such an Israelite. And here is the point of contact between
the personal and the national ‘Servant of Jehovah,’ viz. that
the person is, strange as it seems, the mature product, the
flower and fruit, of the Jewish nation. If all this has a New
Testament sound,—if Jesus Christ, der grosse Jude, as Zinzen-
dorf calls him,'! answers to this description—-so much the
better! But the present writer, at any rate, started from a
point of view—viz. that of Ewald—which is not in the faintest
degree theological. Is not the theological prejudice rather
on the side of our liberal critics ? Why should they grant
the personality of the Messiah (who might surely be a ‘col-
lective term’; comp. Isa. xxxii. I, 2), but not that of the Ser-
vant? May not one of their motives unconsciously be that
the Servant, as described in Isa, xlii—liii., is more distinctly
superhuman than the Messiah ?

2.

I have spoken in the preceding section of the need felt
by the Jewish exiles (among whom the author of II. Isaiah,
to say the least, moves in spirit) of a new ideal, a new object
of hope, and tried to show how this want was actually sup-
plied. It must not, however, be supposed that there was no
point of contact between the new ideal and the old. New
phases of prophecy are as carefully adapted to the old, as to
the moral and social state of the persons for whom they
are primarily designed. Thus the ‘one increasing purpose’
becomes more and more manifest, and no past phase can be
set aside as useless or uninstructive. The connection of the

new ideal with the old is the subject of the conclusion of this
essay.

nation might not be rich in great personalities, and yet the pious might cherish the
longings described above.

‘ Wann, grosser Jude, wann kommt deine Stunde?’ A line in a metrical prayer
sung by Zinzendorf before the Moravian Church on the Jewish Day of Atonement,
Oct. 12, 1739.

? The bearings of this section will perhaps be more fully apparent in the next
essay,

216 ESSAYS.

The Old Testament is pervaded by a longing for the
‘kingdom of God’ to be set up on earth. Jehovah no doubt
was Israel’s heavenly king—a conception, the roots of which
run far back into Semitic antiquity—but the prophets and
other holy men yearned for a time, when He whom with
more and more intensity they believed to be the rightful
Lord of the world should be universally acknowledged by his
liege subjects. The universal and (for the Semitic king was
not an arbitrary despot) spontaneous obedience of mankind
to the will of Jehovah is the kernel of the conception of ‘ the
kingdom of God.’ There is, however, a certain variety in the
way of expressing this conception. According to some Old
Testament passages, Jehovah himself, after an act of swift
and sure judgment, is to undertake the personal government
of the world; according to others, a wonderfully endowed
descendant of David is to be enthroned as his representative.
The former type of expression is particularly prominent in
the later psalms, but is also found in the prophets (see Isa.
iv. 5, 6, xxiv. 23, Joel iii. 21, Zech. xiv. 3-11) ; the latter be-
came current in the prophetic literature through the splendid
revelations of Isaiah, but is far from unrepresented in the
Book of Psalms, though to what extent is a matter of much
controversy.— These two forms of the conception are never
entirely fused in the Old Testament, though an incipient
union, pointing in a New Testament direction, cannot (see pp.
200, 209) fairly be denied.

It is one of the great peculiarities of the last twenty-seven
chapters of Isaiah that they contain no distinct reference to the
royal Messiah. The ‘ David’ in lv. 3, 4 is not the second David
predicted in Hos. iii. 5, Jer. xxx. 9, Ezek. xxxiv. 23, 24, but the
David of the historical books and the Psalms. Still we must
not conclude too hastily that the older Messianic belief has
left no traces in the second part of Isaiah. This would be a
strange result indeed—a dumb note in the scale of prophetic
harmony! Even if the author of the prophecies of ‘the Ser-
vant’ be not Isaiah, he has certainly formed himself, to say
the least, in no slight degree on his predecessor; and in
limning the portrait of Jehovah’s ideal Servant, he was in
a manner bound to preserve some at least of the features of
the Messianic king. And this is what we actually find in the
prophetic description of the Servant. In the statement that
‘kings shall shut their mouths because of him’ (lii. 15), and
that ‘he shall divide spoil with the powerful’ (liii. 12), it is
clear that for the moment the humble-minded Servant is
represented as a conqueror in the midst of a victorious host.

ESSAYS. a5

This is not without analogy,! nor is it so anomalous as it may
seem: It was natural and necessary that the die, from which
the coins with the royal stamp had proceeded, should be broken,
the royalistic form of the Messianic conception having become
antiquated with the hopeless downfall of the kingdom of
Judah; but equally so that fragments of the die should
be gathered up and fused with other elements into a new
whole. The ideal and yet real Israclite of the future has
therefore some points in common with a king, but withal
he is much more than an earthly king. He is a prophet,
for it is written that ‘he shall bring forth (God’s) law to
the Gentiles’ (xlii. 1) ; a priest, for ‘he shall make .. . an offer-
ing for guilt’ (liii. 10) : and yet he is more than a prophet, for
he is in his own person ‘a covenant of the people and a light
of the Gentiles’ (xlii. 6); and more than a priest, for the vic-
tim which he lays down is his own life (liii. 10). Exclusively,
he is neither king nor prophet nor priest, but all of them
together, and more. These are but words ‘thrown out’ (to
adopt a phrase from Mr. Matthew Arnold) at an object beyond
the power of language to describe. Of the Servant of Jeho-
vah, as well as of the earlier Messiah, it may be said, ‘ His
name is called Wonderful.’

V. THE SUFFERING MESSIAH.

I,

‘WE, says St. Paul, ‘proclaim Christ crucified’—in other
words, the suffering Messiah—‘unto the Jews a stumbling-
block” The Christian student may fairly ask, ‘Is this text
a legitimate inference from the Old Testament, or is it an
altogether new phenomenon, and inconsistent with the elder
Scriptures?’ The question is important, for to say that the
Old Testament is contrary to the New would destroy one of
the historical foundations of Christianity. Perfect honesty is
essential in replying ; the truth is often different from what
either of the parties to a controversy imagine.

It is held by many orthodox writers that the presence of
the doctrine of a suffering Messiah in the Talmuds implies
that it was found by the Talmudists in the Old Testament.
However this may be, the Talmudic doctrine of the Messiah
is in itself sufficiently remarkable to deserve special attention,

1 There is, in fact, a parallel for it in Zech. ix. 9 (see next essay).
2 Delitzsch, Zeétschr. f. lutherische Theologie, 1850, p. 34-

218 ESSAYS.

The common statement is that the Jewish divines, being un-
able to deny the prophetic Old Testament references to the
sufferings of the Messiah, assumed that there were two
Messiahs, one the suffering Messiah, the son of Joseph, the
other the triumphant Messiah, the son of David. This does
not, however, appear to be correct. In the first place, the
very title ‘Messiah the son of Joseph’ is opposed to this view,
for it was probably suggested by the Deuteronomic blessing
of Joseph, where it is said that with horns like the wild bull’s
he shall push the people to the ends of the earth.! In the
second, it appears that in many places he is called the
Messiah of war, from which it is to be inferred that his
principal office is to do battle with the enemies of Israel.
This is still more evident when it is said that the kings of the
earth shall go against him; that he is destined to conquer
the kingdom of Edom, or, according to others, Gog and
Magog ; or again, according toa third opinion, that wonder-
ful king, the Antichrist of the Jews, who by a corruption of
the Zoroastrian Ahriman is called Armilis.?

So much, however, is true, and it is this which gives colour
to the prevalent view of this so-called Messiah, that after a
certain time other adversaries are, according to the Aggada,
to rise up against the Messiah and his people, viz., either the
enemies for a time subdued, or else the Arabs, who shall con-
quer the Jews, and slay the Messiah the son of Joseph. And
then the Jews shall mourn exceeding bitterly, as the prophet
Zechariah (xii. 12) foretold, for he who they hoped would
deliver them with an everlasting deliverance is dead. But
when Elijah shall come with Messiah Ben-David, and shall
perform great wonders, and raise the son of Joseph from the
dead, then they shall believe in Ben-David as the Messiah,
and recognise him as their full deliverer.

But if we reject the view that the Messiah called the son
of Joseph was invented to correspond to the prophecies of a
suffering Messiah, we are bound to offer some account of the
origin of the conception. Because, on the view that has just
now been given, the Josephite Messiah is entirely provisional,
and might, it would seem, have been dispensed with. Various
explanations have, in fact, been given. Some have thought

1 Deut. xxxiii. 17.

? See references in Castelli, /2 Messta secondo gli Ebrei (Firenze, 1874), pp. 230-1,
and the translation from the Midrash Vayosha in app. xi. See also Targum on Cant.
iv. 5, where the two Messiahs are both called ‘redeemers,’ and compared to Moses
and Aaron. This, which is given at the head of the article Armilds in the Targumic
and Talmudic Lexicon called the Aruch (7th cent.), seems to me a much more satis-
factory explanation than those discussed by Castelli, which connect the word either
with Romilos (Ronulus=the Romans) or with Armillatus (the epithet given by Sueto-
nius to Caligula), or than that adopted by Gfrorer froin the Aruch (épyéAaos),

ESSAYS. 219

that the proper function of the son of Joseph was to re-
assemble the ten tribes, the final redemption of all the
Israelites being reserved for the true Messiah, the son of
David. This does not seem in accordance with the Jewish
statements, and it is better to suppose! that the Josephite
Messiah is a fanciful embodiment of the prophetic word, that
in the Messianic times Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and
Judah shall not vex Ephraim (Isa. xi. 13). To show how
unavailing an irregular Messiah, corresponding to the ir-
regular northern kingdom, would be to effect a permanent
deliverance, the Aggadic writers, with their characteristic
propensity to romance, invented the idea of a provisional
Messiah springing from the greatest of the northern tribes,
whose early successes did but heighten the gloom of his
premature and decisive catastrophe.

In spite of this error (as it would seem to be) on the part
of Christian controversialists, it was not without reason that
they drew the Jewish doctrine of the Messiah within the
range of their argument. The truth is that there are two
suffering and two victorious Messiahs ; Ben-David and Ben-
Joseph have each of them a claim to both these epithets. It
is evidently the Messiah Ben-David of whom a beautiful
apologue is related in one of the Talmudic treatises.? Let me
quote a few lines from it, as it is instructive in more respects
than one. ‘Rabbi Joshua Ben-Levi found Elijah (the pre-
cursor of the second Messiah, the son of David) standing at
the gate of Paradise; and he asked him, When will the
Messiah come? Elijah answered him, As soon as it is the
Lord’s good pleasure. Then said Joshua Ben-Levi again,
When will the Messiah come? Elijah answered, Go and ask
him thyself. And where doth he tarry? At the gate of the
city (that is, Rome). And by what sign may he be dis-
tinguished? He sitteth among the poor who are laden with
sickness, and he unbindeth one wound after another, and
bindeth it up again.” It is again the Messiah Ben-David
of whom it is said in a Midrash* that while the Messiah was
yet in heaven, Elijah embraced his head, and exhorted him
to suffer, because it had been prophesied by Isaiah that
he should be pained for our transgressions, and oppressed
for our iniquities. Here and in other places there is no
suspicion of a Messiah Ben-Joseph. Let us drop the dis-
tinction therefore as unimportant for our present purpose,

1 Following Castelli, p. 235. Of course, the division of the Messiahship could only
be provisional (comp. Hos, i. rz).

# Sanhedrin, 98 @; see the passage in full in Wiinsche, Die Letden des Messias
(Leipz., 1870).

5 Castelli, p. 209.

220 ESSAYS,

and briefly examine the significance of the doctrine of the
suffering Messiah in general. First, however, let me quote
one or two more passages from traditional sources, without
inquiring to which Messiah they refer. It is said in one place
that at the creation God told the Messiah that the very same
men whose iniquities he atones for would place him under a
yoke of iron, and so afflict him that his tongue should cleave
to the roof of his mouth ; and that God asked him if he was
willing to undergo such tortures. The Messiah asked how
many years they should last, and being told not more than
seven years, he replied that he underwent them with joy and
gladness, on condition that not a single soul of Israel should
be lost.!. Elsewhere we read (it is in a commentary on Zech,
ix. 9”), ‘“ Righteous and having salvation,” ze. the Messiah,
who has justified his judgment upon Israel, when they
laughed at him as he sat in the house of bondmen. There-
fore he is called “ righteous.” And why is he called “having
salvation”? Forno other reason than that he has justified his
judgment upon them. He said unto them, “ Ye are all my
children, for shall ye not all be delivered by the mercy of the
Holy One?” “Humble and riding upon an ass,” ze. the
Messiah. Why is he called humble? Because the whole
of the time he was humiliated in the house of bondmen, and
the transgressors of Israel derided him when they saw that
because of the ungodly, who have no merits, he rode upon an
ass. But the Holy One will remember the fathers, because
of the merits of the Messiah.’ Here the Messiah is evidently
represented as at once atoning for the sins of his people,
and acquiring merit which ensures eternal felicity to all
mankind.

2.

And now the question arises, did this remarkable parallel
to the Christian doctrine arise from the exegetical study
of the Old Testament, or in some other way? Let us first of
all remark that it is not enough to prove to our own satisfac-
tion that the doctrine of the suffering. Messiah is, at least
germinally, in the Old Testament ; we have to show that
there is reasonable ground for supposing that the Jews were
Icd to it simply by tbe exegetical study of the Old Testa-
ment. Such a ground will be produced if we can prove
beyond contradiction that at the Christian era the Jews
already believed in it. Unfortunately this is not the case.
Many critics deny that Jesus Christ looked forward from the

Y Valkut Simeoni, Isa. 1x. (Castelli, p. 337). 2 Quoted by Wiinsche.

ESSAYS. 22T

first to the possibility of a violent death, and refer to the
undeniable fact that Josephus and Philo are only acquainted
with a Messiah who shall follow the road of material con-
quests. And on their side they offer the conjecture that the
Jewish notion of a suffering Messiah was the result of the
action of two combined forces—first, the suffering condition
of the Jews before and after the Roman war ; and secondly,
the Christian atmosphere which more and more surrounded
them. It cannot be denied that this conjecture is in the
highest degree a reasonable one. Even granting that other
forces were at work, it would seem that those forces must
at least be included. The mutual influence of Jewish and
Christian theology, and especially that of Christian upon
Jewish theology, is no secret to anyone who is acquainted
with Church history and recent Jewish researches; while
the longing of the Jews for a sympathetic Messiah, who
should go in and out among themselves, and have experience
of suffering, is eloquently depicted in that exquisite apologue
already quoted from the Talmud.

I say, ‘even granting that other forces were at work’ ;
for I believe that the suffering Messiah is, at least germinally,
in the Old Testament. Only I would ask to be allowed to
draw a distinction. The Jews and the Christian rationalists
are perfectly correct in their statement that there is no Old
Testament reference to the sufferings of the Messiah, if only
it be granted that the definition of Messiah is ‘a victorious
King of Israel of the house of David.’ Such a pedantic
definition, however, plain students of the Scriptures are not
likely to accept. It cannot, or at least it ought not to be
denied that there are two classes of Old Testament passages
relative to the ideal future of the people of God—one in which
the agent of the happy change in their fortunes is a royal
personage of the line of David, and the other in which he is
on the whole rather a persuasive teacher than a king ora
warrior, deeply tried by affliction, and in and through this
affliction the author of a higher salvation than the most
powerful and most warlike king could effect. It cannot
be denied that the functions of these personages (I use the
plural simply provisionally) present manifest points of affinity.
In a word, the object of both is to bring the people of Israel
into accordance with its high ideal and mission. It cannot
be denied, further, that there are here and there points in the
prophetic descriptions connecting the ideal Davidic king with
the lofty sufferer and spiritual redeemer. One of the most
famous prophecies of the Messianic king was in these re-
markable words :—‘ Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion;

222 ESSAYS,

shout, O daughter of Jerusalem ; behold, thy king cometh
unto thee ; he is righteous, and hath been delivered ; humble,
and riding upon an ass, even upon a colt the foal of an ass.’!
There is nothing, I admit, to put by the side of this among
the other prophecies of the Messianic king. But we have no
right on the ground of its uniqueness to explain this one away.
There is no question that the Hebrew ‘0 means ‘humble,’ or
‘humiliated by sufferings, ze. ‘afflicted’ By having this
epithet applied to him, the ideal king of Israel is identified
with that large class of persons in the Book of Psalms, of
whose sufferings so heart-rending a description is given.? It
is clear that when the Psalms were written, and when this
passage of the Book of Zechariah was written, the people of
Israel were, nationally, far from prosperous, and sighed and
groaned for a powerful deliverer. But it was not enough for
the prophet from whom I quote, and for those to whom he
prophesied, that the deliverer should be a just judge and
a virtuous warrior; he must also be one with his people
in experience of suffering, and one who could be touched
with the feeling of their infirmities.

And in like manner there are undeniable points of con-
tact between the principal of the prophetic pictures of the
teacher, sufferer, and redeemer, and the descriptions of the
ideal King. I do not refer to Isa. lv. 3, 4, ‘And I will
make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies
of David, because the view that the word ‘ David’ there used
is a synonym for the Messianic king is the least probable
interpretation. But why should I not refer to the great
culminating passage of the Book of the Servant of Jehovah,
in which it is said that ‘he shall be exalted, and lifted up,
and be very high, that kings shall see his deeds, and shut
their mouths in reverential awe ; and that he shall be givena
portion among the great, and divide the spoil with the strong
(Isa, lii. 13-15, liii, 12)? Surely an open-minded reader
must allow that the writer of these words identifies the
Messianic king with the afflicted teacher and redeemer ; that,
in a word, doth are Messianic, and that we have to look out
for a wider definition of the word Messiah than the pedantry
begotten of controversy would allow. That, in fact, the
progress of revelation or (if rationalists will not allow this)
the progress of religious thought has introduced new ele-
ments into the conception of the Messiah, so that he is no
longer ‘anointed,’ z.e. commissioned of God, principally to
overthrow material obstacles to the establishment of the

1 Zech. ix. 9.
* Dr, Gritz (Psa/men, Bd, i,) strangely identifies these with the _ evites.

ESSAYS. 293

Divine kingdom, but rather to work from within outwards,
conquering the heart of the rebellious by his perfect sacrifice
of himself, and regenerating Israel for the good of the
world.

Let it be granted, then—1. That the Jews and the ration-
alists are in the main correct in their denial of the suffering
Messiah, but only according to their own unnaturally re-
stricted definition of that word. 2. That those who carry on
the orthodox, ze. definite Christian, tradition have enlarged
the meaning of the word Messiah, but in full accordance with
the laws of historical development, and with the author of the
prophecy of the Servant of Jehovah. 3. That there was at
the Christian era an influential body of Jewish students of the
Scriptures, both in Palestine and in Alexandria, who enter-
tained the same restricted views of the Messiah as the
modern Jews, though it is a theory incapable at least of dis-
proof, that there were others in a more obscure position who
instinctively adopted higher views. 4. That the troubles of
the Jewish war, if they did not, as some modern Jews sup-
pose, suggest the doctrine of the suffering Messiah, yet very
greatly increased the number of those who adopted it, and
that it is not improbable that Christian influences, uncon-
sciously to the Jews, promoted their faith in it.

All these concessions may and, I think, must in fairness be
made. They are perfectly consistent both with themselves
and with the exegesis of the New Testament writers. But
they require a not inconsiderable modification of the apolo-
getic treatment of this subject which has hitherto been pre-
valent, especially among ourselves. But how can the apolo-
getic of one age bind that of another? Why should the
section of apologetic which is concerned with prophecy be
deprived of the privilege of growth which is extended to
other sections? What would Bishop Pearson have said to
the apologetical text-books current in our universities in
other theological departments than that of which I am
speaking? Progress is not revolution ; progress may involve
a recasting of some of our ideas, but is it not a condition of
life ? is it not even a sacred, a religious duty to press on into
‘all the truth’? Is there any reason why Old Testament
criticism and exegesis should be excluded from the range of
the providential government and overruling ? Certainly not;
the hearts of my readers are with me ; for I am pleading first
of all for an honest exegesis, and secondly for the interests,
rightly understood, of the Christian faith.

[The above is taken, with a few unimportant alterations, from a univer-
sity sermon, by the author, on ‘The Jewish Interpretation of Prophecy,’

224 ESSAYS.

preached at Oxford, March 20, 1881. The Jewish authorities will be
found in the two works of Castelli and Wiinsche referred to ; the expla-
nation of the division of the Messiahship is from Castelli. On the question
how to account for the difference (already present to the Emperor Julian)
between the Messianic king of prophecy and the picture of Christ in the
Gospels, suggestive remarks are given by Dr. Robertson Smith in the
Encyclop. Britannica, art. ‘ Messiah.’]

VI. THE PRESENT STATE OF THE CRITICAL
CONTROVERSY.

I.

IT is with some hesitation that I cross the border which
separates exegesis from the higher criticism. The public
is eager for results ; a Chaldean Genesis, a Babylonian Isaiah,
and even M. Jacolliot’s Sanscrit life of ‘Jeseus Christna’
receive the same undiscriminating welcome. For though
keenly interested in criticism, the public takes wonderfully
little pains to master the preliminaries. It demands the truth
about Homer, with the slenderest knowledge of the Homeric
poems; and to have the mystery of Isaiah dispelled, when
it has but skimmed the surface of the Isaianic prophecies.
And yet, without calling it ‘a malady of the Greeks’ to
inquire if the Iliad and the Odyssey (or, let us say, the first
and the second part of Isaiah) are by the same author,! the
principal thing for the student of a prophecy is, not to
know who wrote it, but to understand its essential ideas ;
this is important for all—the rest can be fully utilised only by
the historical critic. Parts there may be of the exegesis
which remain vague and obscure till we know the circum-
stances under which a prophecy was written, but these in the
case of IJ. Isaiah form but a small proportion of the whole.
‘Like the Book of Job, the piece is almost purely theological
and occupied with ideas. It isa structure based upon and
built out of the monotheistic conception—the idea that Jeho-
vah, God of Israel, is the true and only God.’? There is no
absolute necessity for an honest exegete to give any detailed
treatment to the higher criticism.

A comprehensive discussion of the problems of the dis-
puted chapters of Isaiah (with which Jer. 1., li. are naturally
combined) is therefore not to be looked for ; and it is chiefly
because I have given the outlines of such a discussion else-

1 Seneca, De brevitate vile, c. 13.
2 Dr, A, B, Davidson, The Expositor, 1883, p. 85.

ESSAYS, 225

where! that I return to the subject here. For though the
pages devoted to it in my earlier work are not yet by any
means superseded, they require both filling up and correcting,
especially in the survey of the arguments for the unity of the
authorship, The present essay will therefore be necessarily
in a high degree incomplete and fragmentary ; in particular,
it omits that comparison of the ideas of the two parts of
Isaiah which is essential to a just appreciation of the rival
theories of authorship, but which can hardly be given without
disclosing some bias in favour of one or another of these
theories? It relates exclusively to the last twenty-seven
chapters: not as if chaps. i-xxxix. constituted ‘the First
Isaiah, and chaps. xl.—Ixvi. ‘the Second,’? but simply be-
cause the data furnished by the disputed chapters in the first
part of the book are found with important additions in the
second ; and it is mainly concerned with one special question
relative to these chapters, viz., what evidence do they afford
as to the locality in which they were composed ?

The section in The Book of Isaiah Chronologically
Arranged headed ‘Arguments in Favour of the Unity of
Authorship’ is introduced by a quotation from Dr. Franz
Delitzsch, containing the admission that ‘there is not a single
passage in the book (Isa. xl—lxvi.) which betrays that the
times of the Exile are only ideally, and not actually, present
to the prophetic writer.’4 It was tempting to make the most
of these suggestive words ; but it was a mistake. One may
still admire the childlike candour and the strong faith in the
absolute security of prophecy, which rendered the admission
possible, but a renewed examination has shown that it was en-
tirely uncalled for, and that some passages of II. Isaiah are in
various degrees really favourable to the theory of a Palestinian
origin. Thus, in lvii. 5, the reference to torrent-beds is alto-
gether inapplicable to the alluvial plains of Babylonia; and
equally so is that to subterranean ‘holes’ in xlii.22. And
though, no doubt, Babylonia was more wooded in ancient
times than it is at present,® it is certain that the trees men-

1/7. C. A., introduction ; Feremiak in Pulpit Commentary, introd. to chaps. 1.
Os Dhite Die Theologie der Propheten (Bonn, 1875) contains such a comparison ;
but, though clever and suggestive, it is crudely written and unsympathetic. Kuenen’s
The Prophets and Prophecy in Israel (Lond., 1877), though not directly comparative,
will also be helpful. Both books exhibit a strong bias.

5 Yet the author of one of the most remarkable products of rationalistic criticism
in England asserts that ‘only the most uncompromising champions of what is taken
for orthodoxy now venture to deny that the Book of Isaiah is the work of two per-
sons. , . . (cc, i-xxxix. constitute the work of the former, cc. xl.-Ixvi. that of the
latter.]’ (Lhe Hebrew Migration from Egypt, Lond., 1879, p. 61, note.)

4 See Z, C. A., Introduction, p. xvii, but comp. the qualifications of this admission

in the new (third) edition of Delitzsch’s Fesaiz, p. 406.
5 Rawlinson’s note on Herod., i, 193.

VOL. II. Q

226 ESSAYS.

tioned in xli. 19 were not for the most part natives of that
country, while the date-palm, the commonest of all the
Babylonian trees, is not once referred to. The fact has not
escaped the observation of Mr. Urwick, who has devoted
special attention to the agricultural and botanical references
in both parts of Isaiah, with the view of obtaining a subsi-
diary argument in favour of the unity of the book.’ Mr.
Urwick, however, does not seem to have noticed that the
argument is a two-edged one. For the trees mentioned in
xli. 19 are for the most part as unfamiliar to a native of
Judzea as toa man of Babylonia? By a similar method it
could be proved that the Book of Jeremiah was written
in northern Israel, because in xvii. 8 a figure is taken from
perennial streams, which were unknown in the drier south ;
and even that the book of the exile-prophet Ezekiel is a for-
gery, because of his frequent references to the mountains and
rivers of Israel (vi, 2, 3, XxxXiv. 13, 14, Xxxvi. I-12, &c.). As
has been remarked elsewhere, ‘a Semitic race, when trans-
planted to a distant country, preserves a lively recollection of
its earlier home. The Arabic poets in Spain delighted in
allusions to Arabian localities, and descriptions of the events of
desert-life. Why should not a prophecy of the Exile contain
some such allusions to the scenery of Palestine, 3 especially,
it may be added, if the natural objects referred to have a sym-
bolical meaning? The allusions will, at any rate, be of small
critical value unless they be supported by historical references,
which unmistakably point away from the period of the Exile.

Such references, however, are really forthcoming, as the
elder traditionalists rightly saw. They are most numerous
and striking in chapters lvi., lvii., Ixv., Ixvi., where, however,
they are probably often under-estimated owing to the preju-
dice produced by the earlier chapters. Let us read them by
themselves, and I think we shall hardly doubt that the de-
scriptions refer to some period or periods other than the
Exile. And yet, on the other hand, it cannot be denied that
there are still more numerous passages which presuppose the
destruction of Jerusalem and the exile of the Jews in Babylon.
How are these conflicting phenomena to be reconciled ?

One way (@) is to suppose that they are Isaiah’s involun-

1 The Servant of Fehovah, p. 49. Mr. Urwick remarks that there were no vine-
yards in Babylonia. But M, Lenormant bus shown that Mesopotamia produced an
abundance of valuable wines (Sy//abaires cunéiformes, Par. 1876, pp. 121-129).

? The myrtle is probably one of the wnfamzliar trees. It is only mentioned (ex-
cluding Isa. xli. 19, lv, 13) in two books of post-exile origin (Zech. i. 8, ro, 11, Neh.
viii. 15), and in the parallel Pentateuch-passage to Neh. /oc. ci¢. the myrtle is omitted
(Lev, xxiii. 40). Dean Perowne has suggested that it may have been imported into
Palestine from Babylonia (Smith's Bzée Dicé., art. ‘ Zechariah '),

5 J.C. A., p. 201.

ESSAYS, 227

tary betrayals of hisauthorship. It will be remembered that,
according to a prevalent theory, Isa. xl.-lxvi. is a ‘mono-
graph’ written by Isaiah in a gwast-ecstatic state for the
future use of the exiles. No one perhaps (putting aside
Dr. Delitzsch) has better expressed this view than the present
Dean of Westminster, who does not, however, venture to
decide upon its merits. ‘The Isaiah,’ he says, ‘of the vexed
and stormy times of Ahaz and of Hezekiah is supposed in
his later days to have been transported by God’s Spirit into
atime and a region other than his own. ... He is led in
prolonged and solitary visions into a land that he has never
trodden, and to a generation on whom he has never looked.
The familiar scenes and faces, among which he had lived
and laboured, have grown dim and disappeared. All sounds
and voices of the present are hushed, and the interests and
passions into which he had thrown himself with all the
intensity of his race and character move him no more, The
present has died out of the horizon of his soul’s vision. . . .
The voices in his ears are those of men unborn, and he lives a
second life among events and persons, sins and suffering, and
fears and hopes, photographed sometimes with the minutest
accuracy on the sensitive and sympathetic medium of his own
spirit; and he becomes the denouncer of the special sins of a
distant generation, and the spokesman of the faith and hope
and passionate yearning of an exiled nation, the descendants
of men living when he wrote in the profound peace of a re-
newed prosperity.’ !

It would carry me too far from my present object to
criticise this theory, but let me observe in passing that, if the
passages with Palestinian references can be taken as uncon-
scious self-betrayals, they furnish a reply to one of the chief
objections by which it has been met. It is commonly said
(and with much justice) that so long-continued a transference
of a prophet’s point of view into the ideal future is without a
parallel. For a short time a prophet of the classical period
may indeed pass beyond his habitual horizon, but he cannot
help betraying his own date in the course of a very few
verses or paragraphs. Whether or not this inference from the
classical prophecies is justified, need not here be discussed,
Suffice it to say that the reply to the objection furnished by
the proposed view. of the Palestinian references is at any rate
plausible, supposing that the passages containing them form
an integral portion of the book.

(4) Another conceivable view (which again I do not pro-

1 Abstract of University sermon by the Rev. G. G, Bradl-y, in the Oxford Under-
graduates’ Fournal, Feb. 18, 1875.

@2

228 ESSAYS.

nounce upon,-but only mention) is this—that the Palestinian
references are the involuntary self-betrayal of a prophetic writer
living in Palestine during the Exile It is clear from several
passages (especially Ezek. xxxiii. 24), and from the fact
that, unlike the northern kingdom, Judah was not colonised
by foreigners after the fall of the state, that a considerable
number of Jews remained behind in their own country. It
is far from incredible that some literary men should have
formed part of this remnant, and that one of them, at least,
should have been a prophet. In fact, it seems almost certain
that Lam, v. was written in Judah during the Exile, and we
cannot suppose that this was the only Palestinian production
of that loug perind. There are passages in II. Isaiah, besides
those already referred to, which may be considered to favour
the view under consideration (e.g. xl. 9, lii. 1, 2, 5 [?], 7-9),
though perfectly capable of explanation on the ordinary
theory. It is no doubt a little difficult to realise the selec-
tion of a prophet in Judah to address the whole body of
the nation (the most important and most cultivated part of
which was in exile), but if there was no equally great prophet
in Babylonia, it was the only possible choice. There may
even have been special advantages in his distance from the
centre of the nation, of which we are ignorant. Certainly
this theory has the merit of simplicity ; it accounts, not only
for the Palestinian features in some of the descriptions, but
for the paucity of the references to Babylonian circumstances.

Yes, it has the merit of simplicity; but that is hardly
a recommendation to ‘those who know.’ If the solution
of this problem is so extremely simple, it will be almost
unique. Complication, and not simplicity, is the note of the
questions and of the answers which constitute Old Testament
criticism. It is becoming more and more certain that the
present form especially of the prophetic Scriptures is due to
a literary class (the so-called Soferim, ‘scribes’ or ‘Scrip-
turists ’), whose principal function was collecting and supple-
menting the scattered records of prophetic revelation. This
function they performed with rare self-abnegation. Ofa regard
on their part for personal distinction there is not a trace;
self-consciousness is swallowed up in the sense of belonging,
if only in a secondary degree, to the company of inspired
men. They wrote, they recast, they edited, in the same spirit

1 So F. W. Seinecke, Der Evangelist des Alten Testaments (Leipzig, 1870); also
apparently H, Oort (at least for some part of II. Isaiah), Theologisch Lijdschrift, 1876,
PP. 528-536.

* Kuenen, Religion of Israel, ii. Padi comp. his Hiéstorisch-kritisch onderzoek,
ii, 150, note 8, iii. 357-8 (on Lam, v.)

ESSAYS, 229

in which a gifted. artist of our own day devoted himself to
the glory of ‘modern painters.” To apply the words of a great
American prose-poet, ‘They chose the better, and loftier, and
more unselfish part, laying their individual hopes, their fame,
their prospects of enduring remembrance, at the feet of those
great departed ones, whom they so loved and venerated.’!
Surely if the prophets were inspired, a younger son’s portion
of the Spirit was granted to their self-denying editors.?

St. Jerome had evidently more than a mere suspicion of
the activity of the Soferim, when he significantly remarked
that Ezra might be plausibly described as the ‘instaurator’
of the Pentateuch. It is, however, to Ewald that we owe the
first rough sketch of their probable proceedings. The sub-
jective element is unreasonably strong in all that great
master’s work; and a careful re-examination of the Old
Testament records from the same literary point of view as
Ewald’s is urgently needed. At the same time his treatment
of the latter part of the Book of Isaiah cannot be com-
plained of on the score of excessive analysis. The only
passages which he denies to have been written by ‘the Great
Unnamed’? are xl. 1, 2, lii. 13-liv. 12, lvi. g-lvii. 11 (by a
prophet of the reign of Manasseh), lviii. 1-lix. 20 (written
soon after Ezekiel). He also maintains, however, that the
author is well acquainted with the works of the older pro-
phets, from which he now and again borrows the text of
his discourse (see, ¢,g., the description of the folly of idolatry
in Jer.x.). Itis this free use of ‘motives’ from the earlicr
literature, and this combination of old material with new in
the manner of mosaic-work, which is characteristic of the
Soferim.

But though Ewald has been the first, or one of the first,

1 Hawthorne's Transformation ; character of Hilda (chap. vi. ‘She chose,” &c.).

+ This habit of recasting and re-editing ancient writings was still characteristic of
Jewish literary men at a much later period. As Dr. Edersheim observes, ‘There are
scarcely any ancient Rabbinical documents which have not been interpolated by later
writers, or, as we might euphemistically call it, been recast and re-edited’ (Sketches of
Fewish Social Life, p. 131). The habit, I say, survived, but the spirit which vivified
the habit was changed. For the editors of the Old Testament are in more than
historical continuity with the subjects of that peculiar influence which we call inspira-
tion, and for the later manifestations of which they help to prepare the way. Iam
glad to notice that one so free from the suspicion of Rutionalism or Romanism as
Rudolf Stier adopts the Jewish theory of grades of inspiration, remarking, however,
that even the lowest grade remains one of faith’s mysteries. "

5 Such is Ewald’s title for the author of the greater part of Isa. xl.-Ixvi., and
abundant has been the contumely it has brought upon him. ‘As if,’ remarks a well-
known Scotch divine, ‘the praise of greatness from human lips could ever compensate
the loss of degrading the noblest of God's prophets into « man nameless and unknown’
(The Old Isaiah, by A. Moody Stuart, D.D., Edinb, 1880, p. 7). Such writers forget
the self-abnegation characteristic of Biblical authors (where there was no special reason
for mentioning their names), and the remark of Origen with regard to the Epistle to
the Hebrews, Tis 5¢ 0 ypawas thy emeoroaAqy, 70 wiv GAnUEs Ocds iden.

230 ESSAYS.

in the field, he has left much land still to be occupied. First
of all, he has taken no account of the possibility that the
author of chaps. xl—Ixvi. not only put old ideas and phrases
into a new setting, but also incorporated the substance of
connected discourses of that great prophet, of whose style we
are so often reminded in these chapters—Isaiah. This is a pos-
sibility which it is impossible to raise to a certainty, or even
to such an approximate certainty as we are so often fain to
be content within literary criticism. For if the work of Isaiah
has been utilised, it has been so skilfully fused in the mind
and imagination of the later prophet, that a discrimination
between the old and the new is scarcely feasible. But the
view is quite in harmony with what we know of the Soferim.
Some of the class were, from a literary point of view, mere
workers in mosaic (to repeat an expressive figure), others were
real artists, real poets and orators, quite capable, therefore, of
such work as we are supposing II. Isaiah to contain. Moreover,
the view offers two especial advantages: 1. It gives a very
simple explanation (though simplicity, as we have seen, is not
always a mark of truth) of the linguistic points of contact
between the original and the ‘ Babylonian’ Isaiah; and 2. it
dispenses us from the necessity of assuming (against the con-
text) such a suspension of the laws of psychology as is implied
on the traditional theory by the mention of ‘ Cyrus? in xliv. 28
(see note), xlv. 1. I may add that it is partly parallel to the
case of certain portions of I. Isaiah, where the preceding com-
mentary has recognised the hand of another writer, perhaps
that of a disciple of Isaiah, reproducing in a new counection
authentic remains of the master’s teaching (see vol. 1 pp. 42,
189, 240). Still it appears to me that the objections urged
in another connection (vol. i. p. 240) against Isaiah’s having
foretold the fall of Babylon have to be met, before this hypo-
thesis can be said to be securely grounded.!

Secondly, there are other parts of II. Isaiah as difficult to
interpret on the theory of the original unity of the book as
any of those which Ewald has mentioned. In fact, from
chap. lili. onwards, it is the exception to find a chapter
without at least some passages which only a careless or an
imaginative exegesis can harmonise with the unitarian theory.
Bleek, who, I need not say, enjoys a high reputation for the

1 The hypothesis is supported by Dr. Klostermann of Kiel in a dissertation in the
Lutherische Zeitschrift for 1876 (pp. 1-60), and in the article ‘Jesaja’ in the second
edition of Herzog's Real-encyclopadie. A worse advocate for a good cause could hardly
be found; such perverse reasoning surprises one in a trained theologian, Still the
fundamental idea deserves attention, Both in the first and in the second part of
Isaiah the presence of exilic prophecies appears as certain to Dr. Klostermanu as to
any of the rationalistic critics,

ESSAYS. 231

caution and reverence of his criticism, points out especially
the three prophecies, xiii. 1-6, Ixiii. 7-Ixv. 25, and chap.
Ixvi., which, according to him, were composed shortly after
the close of the Exile;! and even Naegelsbach, commenting
on Isaiah in Lange’s Bzbelwerk, is so impressed by the pecu-
liarities of chaps. Ixv., Ixvi., that he somewhat arbitrarily sup-
poses them to have been interpolated. ‘It appears,’ he says,
‘that one of the faithful Israelites used every opportunity of
attaching to the words of the prophet a threat against the
abhorred apostates.’ His instances are lxiv. 9-11, lxv. 30 5a,
Ixv. 11, 12, Ixv. 25, lxvi. 3-6, Ixvi. 17.

But I must postpone further remarks on this too seduc-
tive theme. Suffice it if I have made it plain that a number
of important exegetical questions have to be settled before the
Isaianic authorship of Isa. xl.-lxvi.can be thoroughly discussed.
It is possible that it may some day become an approximate
certainty that the latter part of II. Isaiah was once much
shorter, and that the author, or one of the Soferim, enlarged
it by the insertion of passages from other prophets, intro-
ducing at the same time an artificial semblance of unity by
the insertion of a slightly altered version of the gnomic say-
ing in xlviii. 22 as a refrain in lvii. 21. There is nothing dis-
paraging to prophecy in such a view, as long as we maintain
the divine inspiring and overruling influence for which I have
pleaded above. On the contrary, it appears to me that it
does honour to the Spirit of prophecy by enlarging the range
of His operations, according to that saying of the Man of
God in reply to those who ‘envied for his sake,’ ‘ Would God
that all Jehovah’s people were prophets!’ It must be re-
membered, however, that this view can only become an ap-
proximate certainty when the outlines have been sketched of
a history of the later Old Testament literature, in which the
place of these and similar insertions has on reasonable grounds
been indicated. The fault of modern critics has been that
they have considered the Old Testament writings too much
as isolated phenomena, whereas the complicated nature of
the problems urgently demands that the books should be
treated in connection. It may, indeed, be confidently antici-
pated that the history of Old Testament literature will prove
the most effectual justification of Old Testament criticism.

! Introduction to the Old Testament (Eng. Transl.), ii. 49, 50. Bleek, indeed, is of

opinion that the passages referred to were by the same author as the earlier prophecies ;
but this may on plausible grounds be contested,

232 ESSAYS,

2.

There are still a few other points in which I desire to
supplement my earlier statement. 1. As to the paucity of
allusions in chaps. xl.-Ixvi. to the special circumstances of
Babylon. The fact must be allowed ; it was, indeed, so con-
spicuous as to induce Ewald to suppose that the author
resided in Egypt. It is not unfavourable to the authorship
of Isaiah, who might have learned almost as much about
Babylon as is mentioned in these chapters either from travel-
ling merchants, or from the ambassadors of Merodach-Baladan.
The only possible allusion of this kind (if we may press the
letter of the prophecy) distinctly in favour of an exilic date,
is that in xlvi. 1, to the worship of Bel-Merodach and Nebo,
which specially characterised the later Babylonian empire.!
This paucity of Babylonian references would be less surprising
(for prophets and apostles were not curious observers), were
it not for the very specific allusions to Palestinian circum-
stances in some of the later chapters. As I have indicated,
there is more than one way of accounting for it.

2. With regard to style. It is proverbially difficult to
obtain unanimity on a question of style, but I think it will
hardly be gainsaid that the style of the second part of Isaiah
is on the whole in many ways different from that of the first.
This judgment will be none the less valid because it is founded
on animpression. The impression is no casual or arbitrary
one, but produced, as Professor A. B. Davidson truly says,
by the combined force of many elements. ‘It is quite pos-
sible to subject this impression to the crucible and dissolve
it, reasoning it away bit by bit, and then to assert that the
testimony of style is worth nothing. . . . But when the tide
of logic recedes, the impression remains as distinct as ever.’
The question is, whether such a diversity of style as we are
supposing necessarily argues a diversity of authorship. This
can only be decided by a careful examination of the elements
of the diversity ; and here I cannot but think that recent
English scholars have failed; Professor Stanley Leathes,
Professor Birks, and Dr. Kay, all endeavour unduly to mini-
mise the diversity in phraseology between I. and II. Isaiah.
None of them appear to understand what it is that the dis-
integrating critics mean by their appeal to phraseology, and
one can well imagine that they have all felt inclined to use

1 See, e.g., the Birs Nimrud Inscription of Nebuchadnezzar, Records of the Past,
vii. 73-78, in which the names of Marduk and Nabu (and no other gods) constantly
recur. Sargon, it is true, also mentions these deitics with high honour, but makes
Assur piccede them (A. 2’, Vii. 25).

ESSAYS. 723

language in which Dr. Payne Smith has actually expressed
himself, that ‘the aberrations of the human intellect are
infinite’! The truth is, however, that it is not merely upon
isolated words or phrases that those critics found their argu-
ment, but upon ‘the peculiar articulation of sentences and
the movement of the whole discourse ;’ and even within the
field of phraseology, it is not so much upon the fact that
some words are peculiar to the second part of Isaiah, as upon
this, that certain words, though common to both parts, are
used in the second in a peculiar sense, and one which implies
a great development of thought. And so the argument from
phraseology runs up into another (3) based upon the new
ideas and forms of representing ideas in the disputed pro-
phecies, on which on a former occasion some may have
thought that I placed undue reliance. IfI erred, I did so in good
company, for the tendency of the most thoughtful Continental
scholars is in the same direction. Dr. Paul Kleinert, for
instance, in his condensation of the Old Testament Prolego-
mena into tables for the use of students, mentions as the second
argument for the non-Isaianic origin of II. Isaiah that ‘the
development of many primary ideas (PT¥, DAWN, TIN’ Tay, &c.)
is subsequent not only to Isaiah but to Jeremiah’? Still
it is well, perhaps, to be reminded of the necessity of caution,
lest one should be so far carried away in the ardour of criti-
cism as to relegate to a later ‘stage’ an idea which an early
inspired prophet might perhaps under peculiar circumstances
have conceived. On the other hand, conservative scholars
should take into careful consideration whether it is admissible
to maintain that an idea is Isaianic, if it can only be justified
as such by assuming, contrary to the analogy of classical
prophecy, a suspension of the ordinary laws of psychology.’
Too many theologians rush into the thick of prophetic inter-
pretation without any deep study of this most fundamental of
questions,

If I might return fora moment to the argument from
diversity of style, I would venture to supplement the question
as to its critical value raised above by another, Does unity of
style necessarily argue unity of authorship? Dr. Colenso
obviously replied to this in the affirmative when he main-
tained that the Book of Deuteronomy was written by the
prophet Jeremiah, and Ewald and Hitzig, by their treatment
of the Psalms, have given some support to such a position.

1 The Old Testament, with a Brief Commentary by Various Writers (S.P.C.K.).

2 Abriss der Einleitung zum Alten Testament im Tabellenjorm (Berlin, 1878),
Pp. 25. : cae

> On the point thus raised, the student should refer to Prof. Riehm’s Messianic
Prophecy (Eng, Transl., Edinb. 1876).

234 ESSAYS.

But I suppose all that need be inferred from unity of style is
that one of the books which display this unity exercised a
strong influence on the author of the other. We know that
the Soferim had their favourite Scriptures, and it is a conjec-
ture of recent critics that when the prophetic Epigoni edited
the older prophecies, they sometimes added parallel works of
their own (Begleitschreiben), in which they sought to treat
existing circumstances in the spirit of their predecessors.
This is at least a good working hypothesis, and is not in
itself inconsistent with a belief in prophetic inspiration.

4. The argument from parallel passages is sometimes
much overrated. How prone we are to fancy an imitation
where there is none, has been strikingly shown by Mr. Munro’s
parallels between the plays of Shakspere and Seneca ;! and
even when an imitation on one side or the other must be sup-
posed, how difficult it is to choose between the alternatives !
That there are parallels between II. Isaiah on the one hand
and Zephaniah or Jeremiah on the other is certain, and that
the one prophet imitated the other is probable ; but which is
the original one? As I have remarked elsewhere, our view
of the relation between two authors is apt to be biassed by a
prejudice in favour of the more brilliant genius; we can
hardly help believing that the more strikingly expressed
passage must be the more original. A recent revolution of
opinion among patristic students may be a warning to us not
to be too premature in deciding such questions. It has been
the custom to argue from the occurrence of almost identical
sentences in the Octavizs of Minucius Felix and the Afolo-
geticum of Tertullian, that Minucius must have written later
than the beginning of the third century, on the ground that
a brilliant genius like Tertullian cannot have been such a
servile imitator as the hypothesis of the priority of Minucius
would imply. But Adolf Ebert seems to have definitively
proved ? that Tertullian not only made use of Minucius, but
did not even understand his author rightly.

I do not, on the ground of the difficulties encompassing
it, desire to expel this argument from our critical apparatus.
But I do think that it can only be properly used in a compre-
hensive work on the Biblical and especially the prophetic
literature as a whole. And so I come round to my original
proposition that he who would take part, whether as a teacher
or a student, in the controversies of the higher criticism, must
first of all have equipped himself by a self-denying and

1 Yournal of Philology, vol. vi. (Camb. 1876), pp. 70-72. ;
2 Ebert, Tertudlians Verhiltniss 2u Minucius Felix, reviewed in Jahrbicher fiir
deulsche Theologie, 1869, pp. 749-743»

ESSAYS, 235

theory-denying examination of the texts. Can it be said that
all our critics have so equipped themselves, or that all even
of our interpreters have been fully conscious of the moral
pre-requisites ?

VII. CORRECTION OF THE HEBREW TEXT.

THE subject described in the above title is one peculiarly unfit
for an essay ; it is obviously not a dissertation, but facts, which
the reader requires in order to form a well-grounded opinion
upon it; and the facts cannot be condensed into a few pages.
Still, for the same reason that I ventured to sketch the con-
nection which, as I think, exists between the philological and
the theological interpretation of Isaiah, I will devote a brief
study to clearing away some possible misunderstandings aris-
ing out of my treatment of the text.

It is a depressing discovery to the student when he first
realises the weakness of the authority for the received Hebrew
text. And yet the state of the case might fairly have been
anticipated. If, in the judgment of Lachmann and Tischen-
dorf, corruptions of some moment have taken place even in
the text of the New Testament, almost infinitely greater is
the probability that a similar misfortune on a larger scale has
befallen the text of the Old. If Mr. Munro can declare,
speaking of Lucretius, that he is more and more convinced
‘that many manifest errors had their rise in the circumstances
under which our poem first saw the light, how much more
can this be said of texts, written and then copied in a far less
critical age, and in characters peculiarly liable to confusion !
The wonder is, indeed, that the Old Testament writings are
as intelligible as they are, though the question may in some
cases force itself upon us, how far this intelligibility is due
to the original writer, and how far to a later editor’s adapta-
tion of his fragmentary materials. Fully to explain the
causes and investigate the degree of the uncertainty of the
Old Testament text would be a subject well worthy of a
scholar’s pen ; but it is outside my immediate province. A
few hints, however, may fairly be expected, to justify the
critical attitude of the present work. Among the manifold
sources of corruption we may specially mention the great
though slowly effected changes of the characters employed
in writing Hebrew. M. de Vogiié, an authority on Semitic
paleography, writes thus :—

‘If we consider in its entirety the history of the Hebrew

236 ESSAYS.

writing, as it results from the study of the monuments alone,
we may resume it thus :

‘A first period, during which the only writing in use is the
archaic Hebrew, a character closely resembling the Phceni-
cian ;

“A second period, during which the Aramaic writing is
employed simultaneously with the first, and is little by little
substituted for it ;

‘A third period, during which the Aramaic writing, now
become square, is the only one in use.

‘The first period is anterior to the Captivity, and the third
posterior to Jesus Christ.

‘ The limits of the second cannot be determined exactly by
the aid of the monuments alone, for these are entirely wanting ;
but here the traditions and the texts come to our help. The
name of ashiirith “ Assyrian,” given by the Rabbinic school
to the square alphabet; the part in the introduction of that
alphabet which it assigns to Ezra, a collective term for the
totality of the traditions relative to the return of the Jews,
seem to prove that the introduction of the Aramaic writing
coincides with the great Aramaic movement which invaded
the whole of Syria and Palestine in the sixth and seventh
centuries before our era.’ !

It need hardly be pointed out what a wide door this series
of changes opens for confusions of various kinds. In each
of the alphabets referred to some letters are more easily con-
founded than others. We have, therefore, presumably in the
received or Massoretic Hebrew text a combination of the errors
which arose (1) from the confusion of similar letters in the
archaic Hebrew character ; (2) from the confusion of letters
in the archaic alphabet with similar letters in the Aramaic ;
(3) from the transliteration into the later square character ; and
(4) from the confusion of similar letters in the square character
itself, after the texts had been transliterated. We have not
yet made half enough of palzography as an index of possible
corrections ; and it would probably be worth while, as M.
Renan has suggested, to publish selected books of the Hebrew
Bible in the Phoenician character,

! De Vogiié, Mélanges d archéologie orientale (Par. 1868), p. 164. M. Lenormant,
in his Assad sur la propagation de l'alphabet phénicien, assigns the introduction of the
square character to the first century before the Christian era. .

2 For a compact summary of facts, see Dillmann’s article Bideltext des A. T. in
the second edition of Herzog’s Realencyclopidie, or M. Berger's elaborate article
Fcriture, in the theological encyclopaedia published by MM. Sandoz et Fischbacher.
Upon the whole, the student will find no sounder and more experienced guide (so
lucid is his style and so clear his insight) than M. Renan's able ‘collaborateur ‘ in
the Corpus of Semitic inscriptions. For a valuable list of instances of palzeographic
confusions in the texts of the Hebrew Bible and the Septuagint, see Herzfeld’s Geschichte

ESSAYS. 237

Hardly less striking are the facts relative to the date of
the received Hebrew text, and the extant Hebrew MSS.
The former appears to have been settled during the Talmudic
period which preceded the Massoretic, ze, some time before
the close of the fifth century A.D. Since then the text has
no doubt been handed down with scrupulous fidelity, but
whether ‘the oracles of God’ had been as jealously guarded
in the earlier periods, at any rate before the idea of the
canon had attained complete precision, may well be doubted.
In Egypt, as the Septuagint sufficiently proves, the transcribers
of the Old Testament were specially careless: but even in
Palestine, judging from the present state of the Hebrew Bible,
its guardians do not appear to have been fully conscious of
their responsibility. True, there was a higher guardian, Pro-
vidence ; true, the defects of the letter have been overruled to
the good of the Church, which might otherwise have fallen (as
fragments of the Church doubtless have fallen) into worship
of the letter. But the difficulties arising out of these circum-
stances to the exegete are great indeed. Could we feel sure
that the standard text had been formed on a critical, diplo-
matic basis, we might to some extent be reassured. But though
it is only a conjecture, it comes from perhaps the most com-
petent of non-Jewish scholars, and has great probability on its
side, that the received text is derived from a single archetype,
the peculiarities of which were preserved with a ‘servile
fidelity’! And even apart from this, it is but too obvious to
any one with a sense for language that parts of the texts are
extremely incorrect ; and it stands to reason that the post-
Massoretic MSS. (the oldest are not older than the tenth
century) cannot help us in healing pre-Massoretic corrup-
tions.”

These are the grounds on which I venture to urge that
without a temperate use of conjectural (but not purely sub-
jective) emendation, but little progress can be made in Old
Testament exegesis. It is from a real sense of duty that I
have utilised a number of such corrections of the text in my
translation of Isaiah. My experienced reviewer, Mr. Samuel
Cox, fresh from the study of New Testament criticism, is
slightly shocked at this, and kindly attributes it to ‘the influ-
ence of Ewald’s somewhat too arbitrary and impatient genius.’*

des Volkes Fisrael, iii. 80-84 ; and in the Sept. of the Minor Prophets only, Vollers in
Stade's Zeztschrif?, 1883, p. 231.
1 Lagarde, Ammerkungen zur griechischen Uebersetzung der Proverbien (Leipz.
1863), pp. 1, 2; Symmicta (Gotting. 1877), p. 50. Comp. Olshausen on Ps. Ixxx, 14, 16,
? On the extant Hebrew MSS., and cn the state of the text in the Talmudic period,
see Hermann Strack’s Prvlogomena Critica in Vetus Testamentum (Lips. 1873), pp.

59-131.
3 Expositor, May 1880, p. 400.

238 ESSAYS,

This is a misconception which will interfere with the usefulness
of my work. I am in no other sense a follower of that great
critic than is Professor Delitzsch or Professor Kuenen, and, in
the days when the name might not unjustly have been applied
to me, my treatment of the text was much more conservative
than at present. Purely subjective emendation, I repeat, is
not to be admitted on any excuse. If a passage is so utterly
corrupt as to give no clue to the correct reading, a commen-
tator, penetrated with the spirit of Hebrew, may suggest an
approximation to what may have been in the writer’s mind;
but his suggestion should be confined to the commentary,
Some of the corrections proposed with the utmost confidence
by Ewald and Hitzig are as arbitrary as most of those of the
too brilliant Oratorian, C. F. Houbigant, in the last century.
But when a conjecture has some external support, especially
from the versions or from paleography, it is more respectful
to the Hebrew writer to adopt it than to ‘make sense’ by
sheer force out of an unnatural reading. I would not propose
to introduce even these justifiable emendations into a version
for ecclesiastical use (though King James’s translators con-
sciously or unconsciously did admit a few emendations),! but in
a work intended solely for students, it is sometimes necessary
to emphasise them as I have done (never without stating in a
prominent place the received reading), that the reader may
feel the difficulty of the passage, and judge of the effect of the
alteration. Otherwise we may go on for ever, crying Shalom,
shalom, when the text is far indeed from ‘ peace’ or ‘soundness.’
With a good will and some poetic imagination most readings,
at least in the poetical and prophetical books, admit of a
plausible translation ; but at what a grievous cost to grammar
(some grammatical rules must surely be admitted), and toa
critical conception of the duties of an interpreter !

The slightest changes are, of course, those which affect
the vowel-points, which, as we are too prone to forget, form,
properly speaking, no part of the text.2 They represent a
comparatively ancient exegetical tradition, and stand on a
somewhat similar footing to the versions, especially to the
Targums, which in some obscure places enable us to interpret
the pointed text. But the early exegetical schools had pre-
judices of their own (sce, ¢.g., on xliii. 28, Ixiii. 3, 6), and we
ought not to regard any of them as infallible. The Church
has abstained in her wisdom from giving more than a negative

1 See, e.g., 1 Sam. xiii, 1, xiv. 21, 2 Sam. xv. 19, Jer. 1. 5, Hos, i. 9, Ps. viii. 1
evii. 3, Eccles, ii. 24. Alterations of the Hebrew text in accordance with one or
more of the ancient versions (e.g. 2 Sam, xiii; 39, Jer. xix, 13, Job xxxiii, 17) are also

not altogether uncommon in the Authorised Version.
? On the origin of the punctuation, see Griitz, Geschichte der Fuden, v. 154.

ESSAYS. 239

rule of interpretation ; why should we submit to the yoke of
the doctors of the Synagogue? I would not, however, be in
a hurry to forsake the reading of the points. Doubtless future
critics may find much to amend, but the alterations of Dr.
Klostermann'! are rather beacons of warning than examples
of critical tact.

It will surprise no student of the Septuagint that I have
followed Gesenius, Ewald, and Hitzig in omitting, or bracket-
ing, certain intrusive glosses (see iii. I, vii. 17, 20, viii. 7, ix.
15, XXVili. 20, Xxix. 10, xxx. 6, part of xxxv. 8, li. 11, Ixiil.
11, xiv. 34), analogous to those which disfigure the Alexan-
drine version. The only question can be whether a more
advanced critical study of the text may not add to their
number. For instance, the concluding verse of chap. ii., verses
10 and 11 of chap. iii, a word in xxx. 23, and a phrase in
xxx. 26 seem very suspicious. The first and last of these
are omitted in the Septuagint, which gives a certain external
support to the view that they are interpolations ; the one, as
it is in itself fine, has been retained in this edition, the latter
has been expunged, because it spoils a fine poetical passage.
I feel, however, that great caution is necessary, and only wish
to make a practical protest against the infallibility of the
text.

Without idolising the Septuagint (the Hebrew text of
which contained many of the same corruptions as our own),
its value as a text-critical help is great indeed. It is true,
Professor de Lagarde would have critics postpone using
it altogether until its text has been restored to the ‘ original
form. ? There are two objections to this :—1, the valuable
results which have been already attained by the critical
use of the Septuagint (it is sufficient to refer to the labours
of Thenius and especially of Wellhausen on the text of
Samuel)—results which would have had to be foregone
if Professor de Lagarde’s wishes had been consulted ; and 2,
the extreme difficulty of his own plan for a critical edition of
the Septuagint, which in fact seems to relegate the desired
end almost to the Greek Calends. Surely we cannot be
justified in neglecting so important a witness to the Egyptian
form of the pre-Massoretic text, provided that we remember,
I, that our best MSS. of the Septuagint (not excepting B)
are very faulty, and 2, that the Hebrew MSS. which the
Alexandrine translators employed were probably still faultier.

But is it not hopeless to correct the text of the Old Testa-
ment, when the critical authority both of the Hebrew and of

1 In the article in the Lutherische Zeitschrift already referred to (1876, pp. 1-60).
2? Anmerkungen zur griech, Uebers, d. Proverbien, pp. 2, 3-

240 ESSAYS.

the Greek is solamentably scanty ? Modifying a well-known
German proverb, I would reply that we ought not to allow
an impossible Better to be the enemy of the Good. A
perfect text is unattainable, and perhaps in one sense un-
desirable ; but a more perfect one than we now possess is
within our reach. It would not be right, from a philological
point of view, to exclude the Hebrew text from the operation
of improved critical methods; and much more, from a theo-
logical point of view, to exhibit any certainly or all but
certainly corrupt passage as the inspired ‘Word of God.’ The
needs of the period of the Reformation were met by the Re-
formation scholars ; those of a more scientific and historical
age require the application of sounder critical principles. The
time for indifference on the part of religious students has gone
by. It may be the fact that the leaders of modern criticism,
whether in the correction of the text or in still thornier fields,
have been often devoid of interest in spiritual truths. But
there is no law either of nature or of grace that it should be
so. It isa pure loss to reverent readers of the Bible to be
shut off from the invigorating influences of critical research.
For the true spiritual meaning of the Scriptures can only be
reached through the door of the letter; and the nearer we
approach to a correct reading of the text, the more vivid will
be our apprehension of the sacred truths which it conveys.

[Three recent dissertations are concerned with the textual criticism
of the Book of Isaiah :—

Hermann L. Strack, ‘Zur Textkritik des Jesaias’ in Zedtschrift fiir
lutherische Theologie, 1877, pp. 17-52. Valuable from its account of the
St. Petersburg MSS.

G. L. Studer, ‘ Beitriige zur Textkritik des Jesaja,’ in Jahrbiicher fir
protestantische Theologie, 1877, Heft 4; 1881, Heft 1. Confirms the
view that an editor of Isaiah has to strike the mean between conservative
immobility and the ‘chartered libertinism’ of hypothesis.

Paul de Lagarde, Semtica, Part I. (Géttingen, 1878). Pp. 1-32 con-
tain critical notes, occasionally very striking, on chaps. i.-xvil. of Isaiah.

1 ought also to mention Abraham Krochmal’s collection of emenda-
tions of the text of the Old Testament, always acute, and sometimes
hitting the mark, under the title Hahsaw wehamichtow, oder Schrift und
Urschrift (Lemberg, 1875). Among older books, Kocher’s reply to Bishop
Lowth in behalf of the Massoretic text, called Vindicie@ S. Textis Hebrai
L£saie Vatis (Berne, 1736), is little known, but worth consulting.]

ESSAYS. 241

VIII. THE CRITICAL STUDY OF PARALLEL PASSAGES.

I,

THE exaggerated value sometimes attached to the argument
from parallel passages must not drive us to the other extreme
of treating them as non-existent or unimportant. This
thought, among others, has suggested the present essay, one
object of which is to qualify and supplement the discouraging
remarks which the over-statements of some critics obliged me
to offer (p. 234). It would indeed be an unfortunate result,
were any of my student-readers to draw an inference from
words of mine unfavourable to the study of parallelisms of
expression—a study which is, in my own opinion, a whole-
some and much-needed corrective of the various kinds of
theoretical bias. The criticism of the Old Testament, which
draws its material from so many sources, may yet derive some
light from a discriminating selection of parallel passages ; and
so, still more manifestly, may its exegesis. The principle of ex-
plaining the Scriptures by themselves has, it is to be feared,
fallen into some disrepute, for which the blunders of our
popular ‘Reference Bibles’ supply an ample justification,
And yet our forefathers, whose uncritical but devout Scripture-
knowledge is piled up, stratum above stratum, in these editions,
were doubtless right in their principle, however widely they
may have erred in its application. A few pages will not be
wasted on the enforcement of this doctrine, especially as a
request made in my first preface fell but too probably on
unheeding ears.

Self-abnegation is the mark of prophetic writers quite as
much as of their editors (comp. p. 228). They experienced
no Sturm und Drang, no ‘ storm and stress’ of an unchastened
individuality. They never attempted to set themselves on
high, on the pedestal of original genius. Isaiah, che sovra gli
altri come aguila vola, is as dependent on his less famous pre-
decessors as a Marlowe or a Shakspere. On at least two
occasions (such at least is the most probable view of chap.
ii, 2-4 and the main part of chaps. xv. I-xvi. 12) he inserts
passages from earlier prophets, whose entire works have not
come down to us ; and he is not without some striking affini-
ties (some of which at least will be reminiscences) of contem-
porary prophets. Look again at his elaborate style, and the
artistic distribution of his poetic material! His art is no
doubt subordinate to his inspiration, but in no disparaging’

VOL, II, R

242 ESSAYS,

sense ; and its comparatively high perfection attests a longer
history of Hebrew poctry and prophecy, and a more numerous
band of unrecorded prophetic writers, than we are accustomed
to suppose. But it is enough on this head to refer to the
Introduction to Ewald’s great work on the prophets (now
translated) ; I content myself here with grouping (and observe
it is on this grouping that the value of ‘references’ largely
depends) a few striking parallels between the prophet Isaiah
and other writers—first of all, those who are acknowledged
on all hands to be his predecessors or contemporaries ;) next,
those respecting whose chronological relation to Isaiah more or
less doubt has arisen ; and lastly, some of those who certainly
belong to a later age. In conclusion, it will be only fair to set
down some of the striking parallels between the acknowledged
and the disputed portions of the, Book of Isaiah, and also
some of the parallel passages for the latter in other books of
the Old Testament.

To the first of the three classes of writers mentioned belong
Amos, Hosea, and Micah, the two former being older, the
latter probably younger, than our prophet. It has been well
observed that the characteristics of Amos and Hosea have
found their synthesis in Isaiah.? It is not surprising, there-
fore, that there should be striking points of affinity between
these three prophets—of an affinity, moreover, which extends
beyond mere forms of expression to fundamental conceptions
and beliefs. Take the following carefully selected instances:
the student will be repaid for the trouble of examining them
by a more critical and comprehensive knowledge of the
prophetic Scriptures.

Isa. i. 11, 14 Am, v. 21, 22, Hos. vi. 6, Mic. vi. 6-8 (against formal

worship).
9 WW 2 » 1x. 13, Hos. li. 21, 22 (fertility in the Messianic age).
aio Nel, 12 » vi. 5-7 (luxury of the princes).
» Vv. 20 » Vv. 7, vi. 12 (confusion of morals).
» ix. 10, &c. 4, 1x. 11, 12 (the Messianic empire).
Fira Gee) Hos. iv. 15 (spiritual adultery).
9 de 23} yy ix. 15 (‘law-makers, law-breakers’),
5. 1 29 » iv. 13 (idolatrous groves).
Bs hey Mic. i. 2 (prosopopovia of inanimate nature).
” ii. 2-4 ” iv. 1-3.]
Pe | (a OL) » ill. 2, 3 (strong figure of oppression).
» v8 » li. 2 (violent extension of landed estates).
” ce t yy V.- 3-5 (the Messiah and his birth).
” i
4) XXX, 22 »» V. 13 (idols to be destroyed in the Messianic age).

1 J.e, the predecessors or contemporaries of the author of the acknowledged pro-
phecies. The disputed prophecies require, of course, to be considered separately,
2 Duhm, Die Theolugie der Prophelen, p. 104,

ESSAYS. 243

Isa. xxxii. 13, 14 Mic. iii, 12 (destruction of Jerusalem).
» XXXVI I7 4, Vil. 19 (strong figure for the forgiveness of sin).

The second class of writings to be compared with Isaiah in-
cludes especially Job, Joel, Zech. ix.—xi., the Psalms, and the
Pentateuch.' I venture to offer these as fair specimens of
parallel passages :—

Isa. i. 8 Job xxvii. 18 (figure from a booth in a vineyard).
9 Veg » vill. 16 (root and branch consumed).
yy XIX. 5 y Xlv. II (rivers dried up—a quotation).

» XIX. 13,14 4, xii24,25 (figurative description of general unwisdom).
» Xxvili. 297 4, xi. 6 (God’s wisdom marvellous).

yy XXxiii. 11 » XV. 35 (reap as you sow).
» Xxxvili, 12 ,, iv. 21, vii. 6 (figures from the tent and the weaver’s
shuttle).

(See also the other parallels between the Song of Hezekiah
and the Book of Job in vol. i. p, 228.)

Isa. ii. 4 Joel iii. 10 (‘swords into ploughshares,’ and the reverse).
3 Ive 2 » iii. 18 (fertility in the Messianic age).
» =X. 23 ;
ss xxviii 22 t » iv. 14 (pon).
xxxli, 15 » li, 22-29 (outpouring of the Spirit, &c.).
xl. I-4 : Cee :
» word 1 Zech.ix. 9 (the Messianic King).
ne TF »» X, 10 (return of captives from Egypt and Assyria).
w Xxvil. 13
» vil. 14 : ret:
» viii. 8, 10 Ps. xlvi. 7, 11 (God, or Jehovah, is with us).
ue sit Te xlvi. 3, 6 (the enemies compared to a flood).
” >
» IX. 5 »» Xlvi. 9 (the instruments of war broken).
» XXxili.I3 ,, xlvi, 10 (summons to the heathen to acknowledge
Jehovah).
» xxxiii18 — ,, xlviii. 13 (‘counting the towers ;’ see my note on
Isa. 2. ¢.).

9 XXxiii 21 » xlvi. 4 (Jehovah comp. to a river; see on Isa. 2. ¢.).

9 XXxiii. 22 » xlvii. 6 (our king’). ;

» XXxiii, 22 » xlviii. 14 (the nation’s divine patron ; Delitzsch re-
marks: ‘There is reason to conjecture
that the proper concluding words [of
Ps. xlviii.] are lost. The original close
may have been in fuller tones, and have
run somewhat as Isa. xxxiii. 22’).

» i 2@ Deut. xxxii. 1 (‘ Hear, O heavens’).

» ad 9 » xxxii. 6, 20 (faithless children)
n o

1 i might have added Judges, Joshua, and 2 Samuel (see notes on ix. 4, x. 26,
xxviii, 21), Joel and Zech. ix.-xi, are included out of deference to the traditional
Opinion ; for personally I have no doubt that Joel, and, in its present form, the whole
of the latter part of Zechariah, belong to post-Exile times. The question of the date
of the Book of Job is too intimately connected with that of the date of 11. Isaiah for
me to hazard an opinion upon it here.

? See critical note, p. 154 of this volume.

R2

244 ESSAYS.

3 Deut. xxxii. 6, 28, 29 (‘ Israel is without knowledge’).
.6 »» xxviii. 35 (Israel’s sickness).
i. 7 » xxix. 22, Auth. Vers. 23 (ADpN»).

9, Io » xxxii. 32 (‘Sodom, Gomorrah’).

i
1
1

» : 17, 23 Ex, xxii. 22, Deut. xxvii. 19 (the orphan and the widow).
i

i. 19 Lev. xxv. 18, 19, xxvi. 18, 25 (prosperity through obe-
dience).
gp: de 245 AMT;
x. 16, 23 Ex, xxiii, 17, xxiv. 23 (v1.5 also Mal. iii. 1),
XIX. 4
» ili, 1d
(but see ¢ Lev. xxvi. 26 (the staff of bread).

note)
» lig Gen. xix. 5 (‘their sin as Sodom’).
so VS Ex. xiii. 21, Num. ix. 15, 16 (‘a cloud by day,’ &c.).
» v8 Deut. xix. 14 (violent extension of estates).
9» ~V. 10 ») | XXvili. 39 (curse upon the vineyards).
$0 .VR23 » Xvi. 19, Lev. xix. 15 (unjust judgment),
v. 26 om : : a5
e soodlil, 19 »» xxviii. 49 (the swift, unintelligible foe).
x. 26 ears = :
z xi. 15, 16 Ex. xiv. 21, 22 (the passage of the Red Sea).
yy Xii. 26 » xv. 2(song of Moses quoted).

sy KAN. LT Deut. xxxii. 30, Lev. xxvi. 8 (‘one thousand at the re-
buke of one’).

The exegetical value of these parallels is too obvious to
need exhibiting. Their critical significance, however, which
is sometimes even greater, may not be at once apparent.
First with regard to Job. I would not venture to assert that ~
all the passages quoted involve reminiscences on the one side
or the other ; and yet in some cases this is too plain to be
mistaken. Thus (a) between Isa. xix. 5 and Job xiv. 11 the
most scrupulous critic must admit a direct relation of debtor
and creditor, though which passage is the original is a ques-
tion differently answered. And (6) the parallels referred to
on Isa, xxxviii. 12, &c. are held by one of our leading com-
mentators (Hesekiah’s authorship of the Song being assumed)
to prove the Solomonic (or, more strictly, the pre-Hezekianic)
origin of the Book of Job. Secondly, with regard to the
Pentateuch. The number of references to Pentateuchal nar-
ratives is smaller in the acknowledged than the disputed pro-
phecies, and appears to me insufficient to justify even a con-
jecture as to Isaiah’s acquaintance or non-acquaintance with
that famous Elohistic document, the date of which is so excit-
ing a subject to modern critics. Wecannot even be sure that
Isaiah refers to any written narrative ; his language may be
perfectly explained from oral tradition. It is different, I think,
with regard to the apparent allusions to Deuteronomy. The
presumption from the number of such references in the first

ESSAYS. 245

chapter of Isaiah certainly is that the author or editor of
that chapter had the book, or a part of the book, of Deutero-
nomy before him. But I must not allow myself to wander
too far from the exegetical frontier (p. 224), and will only add
a remark on the parallels between Isaiah and Psalms xlvi—
xlviii, It has been conjectured by Hitzig (with whom I was
formerly inclined to agree) that the latter are the lyric effusions
of the prophet Isaiah on occasion of the successive overthrows
of the Syrians, Philistines, and Assyrians.! It is, however,
simpler, and therefore perhaps in this case safer to explain:
their Isaianic affinities from the influence of the prophet upon
contemporary writers. I say ‘contemporary writers’ advisedly ;
for though, in deference to Dr. Delitzsch,? I have placed these
psalms in the second rather than in the first class, I can
entertain no doubt that they belong at any rate to the age of
Isaiah and Hezekiah.

Class III. includes Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Zech. i.
-viii, xii—xiv.,3 Ezekiel, and above all, Jeremiah, upon whom
the acknowledged prophecies of Isaiah exercised a most
powerful influence. Compare

Isa. xxviii. 4 Nahum iii. 12 (simile of the early fig).

» xi Q Hab. ii. 14 (‘the earth full of the glory of Jehovah’).
XXXxIli. I » ii, 8 (retribution to the tyrant).

xviii. 1,7 | Zeph. iii. 10 (tribute from beyond Ethiopia).

» ii. 3,iv.r Zech, viii. 21-23 (spiritual honour of Jerusalem and the

Jews).
» xix. 24 » viii. 13 (Israel a source of blessing).
gy VLE T3 y»» xii. 9 (repeated purifications).
ed he 3 Jer. viii. 7 (irrational creatures wiser than Israel).
gy os Tj? » Vi. 20, vii. 21 (formal worship unacceptable).
» Ve I-7 » ii, 21 (Israel compared to a vine).
Wis » i. (inaugurating vision).
» Vi. 9, 10 yy V. 21 (judicial blindness).
» XV. xvi. y Xlviii. (against Moab).
MY a : » Xxlli, 5, xxiii. 15 (the righteous King).
nn tl
‘yy XXXxili. 19 » v.15 (the unintelligible foe).
9 X. 20-22 Ezek. vi. 8, xii. 16 (the remnant of Israel).
9 AVS 2 » vii. 18 (‘on all their heads baldness’).

‘yy Xxxvi. 6 3 xxix. 6, 7 (Egypt a ‘cracked reed’).

I now turn to the parallels between the acknowledged
and the disputed prophecies of Isaiah, less with the view of
furnishing material for the higher criticism than of helping
the reader to form a fuller idea of the literary and prophetic

1 Hitzig, Dée Psalmen (Ieipz. 1863), vol. i. p. xxiii. ; C.A., Introduction, p. xv.

2 This critic, followed by Canon Cook in the Speaker's Commentary, places these
psalms in the reign of Jehoshaphat (comp. 2 Chron. xx.).

3 Zech, ix.-xi. ought, however, in my opinion, to be included ; see above, p. 243,
note },

246 ESSAYS.

physiognomy of the book. For, to be quite candid, I do not
believe that the existence of such numerous links between the
two portions of Isaiah is of much critical moment. There are
points of contact, as striking, if not as abundant, between Old
Testament books which no sober critic will ascribe to the
same author. Dr. Moody Stuart’s remark, questionable even
in reference to ordinary literature, is especially so in its
application to inspired writers :—‘ An assiduous author might
become the double of another by a skilful repetition of his
ideas. But he cannot by any art fashion himself into his second
half ; he cannot engraft his own conceptions into the other’s
mind by completing his deepest thoughts, and so fit them in,
and fill all up, as if only one thinker had conceived the
whole.’! On the contrary, it isa characteristic of the prophetic
literature that, in the midst of superficial divergences, there
is a fundamental affinity between its various elements. As-
cribe it, as you please, to the overruling divine Spirit, or to
the literary activity of the Soferim (see p. 228), or to both
working in harmony, but the fact cannot be denied. We may
now proceed to compare—

i. 11, 13 with Ixvi. 3 (against formal worship).
1. 15 » lix. 2, 3 (prayers unanswered through sin),
i. 21 » lvii. 3-9 (spiritual adultery).
i. 26 » xi. 3 (‘City of righteousness, ‘Oaks of righteous-
ness’).
i. 27, iv. 2, 3,
vi. 13, x. 20, » Xlviii. I0, lix. 20, Ixv. 8, 9 (doctrine of the ‘rem-
22, XXxvil. 31, nant’).
32 |
i. 29 y _ lvii. 5, Ixv. 3, Ixvi. 17 (idolatrous gardens),
i. 30 » _lxiv. 6 (figure of the fading leaf).
ii. 2, 3 », vi. 7, lx. 12-14 (pilgrimages to the temple).
ii, 11,17,v.15 ,, xl. 4 (high things abased).
ili. 26 yy li. 17, lil. 1, 2, Ix. 1 (Zion sitting on the ground),
v.7 9) 1x. 21, lxi. 3 (Israel, Jehovah’s planting).
v. 13, Vi. 12, xi.
II, xxii. 18, » X1.-Ixvi. (captivity, though the parallel is incomplete).
xxxix. 5-7 (?)
vi. I » Ivii. 15, Ixvi. 1 (the two divine thrones).
vi. 9, 10, xxix. 18 ,, xlii. 7, 18-20, xliii, 8, xliv. 18, Ixiii. 17 (judicial blind-
ness).
vi. II y», xiv. Io, 11 (cities laid waste).
ix. 8 » xiii. 9, lv. 11 (self-fulfilling power of prophecy).
xi. I » lili. 2 (the puny Plant).

2 » xi. I (the Spirit rests upon the divine Agent).
xi. 6-9, xxx. 26 ,,_ Ixv. 17-25, Ixvi. 22 (future glorification of nature).
XXVHl. 5 4, lxii. 3 (Jehovah a ‘crown’ to His people; His

people a ‘crown’ to Him).
xxvill. 1, 7, 8 » vi. 11, 12 (carousing habits of the rulers).
xxix. 16 » Xlv. 9, Ixiv. 8 (the clay and the potter).
XXxiL. 15 » Xliv. 3, 11 (outpouring of the Spirit).

1 The Old Isaiah (Edinb. 1880), p. 41.

ESSAYS. 247

Better proofs than these can hardly be required of the
intimate connection between I. and II. Isaiah. The writer of
the latter prophecies evidently knows the former, as our
native idiom finely has it, ‘ by heart.’ Some readers, however,
may perhaps be impressed more by exact verbal correspon-
dences, such as the following :—

Sys wip ‘Israel's Holy One,’ fourteen times in the acknowledged
prophecies (including x. 17), and fourteen times in the disputed ones
(including xlix. 7). Comp. also ‘your Holy One,’ xliii. 15. Rare
outside Isaiah.

437) ) ‘the mouth of Jehovah hath spoken,’ i. 2, 20; also xl. 5,
Iviii. 14. Peculiar to Isaiah (but Mic. iv. 4 has ‘7 MINDY 5).

“y "pN’ ‘saith Jehovah’ (the imperfect tense), i. 11, 18, xxxiii. 10 ; also
xli. 21, Ixvi. 9 (comp. xl. 1,25). Peculiar to the Book of Isaiah,
Ps. xii. 6 being an echo of Isa. xxxiii. 10.

‘aN ‘hero,’ as a title of Jehovah in relation to his people, i. 24 (see
note) ; also xlix. 26, Ix. 16. Only parallels, Gen. xlix. 24, Ps. cxxxii.

2, 5
nv) O59 ‘high and exalted, ii. 13, vi. 1; also lvii. 15 (comp. lii. 13, Ivii.
7). Peculiar to Isaiah.
D'p toa» ‘streams of water’ or ‘water courses,’ xxx. 25; also xliv. 4.
Peculiar to Isaiah.
My mountains,’ xiv. 25; also xlix. 11, Ixv. 9. So Ezek. xxxvili, 21
(omitted in Fiirst’s Concordance), and Zech. xiv. 5.

It would be easy to make out a longer list, but the gain
would, in my opinion, be problematical. I am not a Pro-
fessor of Philosophy, and cannot think that a valuable
‘cumulative argument’ is produced for the unity of Isaiah by
counting up words like 738 and }'a8, M8 and Ws, which occur
(how could they help occurring?) in both parts of the book ;
and it is with real sorrow that I notice a ‘tutor in Hebrew’
priding himself on the discovery that ‘ v",and its participle
or noun, occurs fourteen times in the later portion, and seven
times in the earlier”! Perhaps, however, the following data
deserve to be mentioned, if it be only to warn the student
against overrating the force of the previous instances :—

WN ‘glow’ or ‘glowing fire, xxxi. 19; also xxiv. 15 (?), xliv. 16, xlvii.
14,111. Elsewhere only Ezek. v. 2.

DN ‘countries’ (specially used of the maritime countries of the
West), xi. 113 also xxiv. 15 (?), xl. 15, xli. 1, and ten other pas-
er (But note the infrequency in I. Isaiah, and see further

elow.

ND ‘to create? iv. 5; also xl. 26, xli. 20, xliii. 7, and thirteen other
passages. (But the infrequency of this word in the first part con-
trasts remarkably with its frequency in the second. It is not
specially Isaianic, where as the emphasison the divine creatorship
is peculiarly deutero-Isaianic. See Last Words on iv. 5.)

pri ‘the stock of a tree, xi. 1; also xl. 24. Elsewhere only Job xiv. 8.

nw) ‘to dry up,’ xix. 5 (Nifal); also xli. 17 (Kal). Elsewhere only
Jer. xviii. 14 (Nifal; transposing letters), li. 30 (Kal).

1 Urwick, The Servant of Fehovah, p. 37.

248 ESSAYS,

D'NSNY ‘offspring, xxii. 24 ; also xxxiv. 1, xlii. 5, xliv. 3, xlviil. 19, Ixi.
9, Ixv. 23. Elsewhere only four times in Job.

inn ‘chaos, or ‘a thing of nought’: a characteristic word derived
from the narrative of the cosmogony: xxix. 21, also xxiv. Io,
Xxxiv. 11, xl. 17, 23, and six other passages. The same remark
applies as in the case of N72. :

osysyn ‘vexatious petulance, iii. 4; also Ixvi. 4. Peculiar to this
book. (But the related verbal stem is not uncommon.)

To these we may add two phrases: (a2) Ssqwiong3 ‘the
outcasts of Israel, xi. 12, lvi. 8; elsewhere only Ps. cxlvii. 2,
But the value of this correspondence will be diminished by
comparing xvi. 3, 4, Xxvii. 13, Jer. xl. 12, xliii. 5, Deut. xxx.
4; (0) 722° 1 ‘who can turn it back’ (said of God’s work),
xiv. 27; also xliii. 13 (see note), and three times in Job (witha
different suffix). And, lastly, a linguistic fact of much more
importance, viz. the habit of repeating a leading word in
successive clauses, which is characteristic of both portions
of the Book of Isaiah. See i. 7, iv. 3, vi. 11, xiv. 25, xv. 8,
XXX. 20, Xxxvii. 33, 34; and also xiii. 10, xxxiv. 9, xl. 19,
xlii. 15, 19, xlviii. 21, 1. 4, li. 13, Hii. 6, 7, liv. 4, 13, Iviii. 2,
lix. 8.1. In grammatical parlance, it is the figure éravadopd,
another variety of which abounds in the so-called Step-psalms
(as the very name, perhaps, is intended to indicate) and in the
Song of Deborah.

It still remains to furnish references to parallel passages
for the disputed portions of Isaiah, corresponding to those
which have been already given for the undisputed ones. Some
of these, of course, will be originals, some will involve re-
miniscences, while a few may perhaps arise from undesigned co-
incidences. We must also allow for the bare possibility that, in
the case of two parallel passages, neither one may be original,
but both dependent on some lost work. It is specially im-
portant to bear this in mind in an enquiry peculiarly liable to
be impeded by prejudice, that prejudice I mean which is
unavoidably caused by the combination of the acknowledged
and the disputed prophecies in one volume. Let me also
remind the reader of the grounds for caution which I have
mentioned above, derived from the phenomena of non-Biblical
literatures (p. 234). Compare, then—

Isa. xiii. 19 with Deut. xxix. 23, Heb. 22 (the ‘ overthrow’ of Sodom
and Gomorrah); but Am. iv. 11 is a closer
; parallel),
y xxiv. 18 ¢ » Gen. vii. 11 (‘windows opened’ at the Deluge).
» xl. 2 » Lev. xxvi. 41, 43, comp. 34 (‘guilt paid off’).
a» eae ! » Deut. xxxii. 39 (“I am He’).
a RL 13 3 5 » (‘none that rescueth out of my hand’).

1 ‘The evamples are taken from Delitzsch, who remarks that the list is not offered as
complete.

ESSAYS. 249

Isa. en 9 t with Gen. xi. 31-xii. 4 (call of Abraham and Israel).

xiii. 16,17

» lig, 10 » Ex. xiv. 21-31 (passage of the Red Sea).

yy Ixiii, TI-13 .

y xiii. 27 y Gen. xxv. 29-34, xxvii. (Jacob’s sins).

» Xxliv. 2 » Deut. xxxii. 15, xxiii. 5, 6 (Jeshurun).

» Xivili. 19 » Gen. xxii. 17, xxxii. 12 (Israel as the sand).

» Xlviii. 21 » Ex. xvii. 5-7, Num. xx. 7-13 (water from the rock).

” es ae ; » Ex. xxi. 7, Deut. xxiv. 1 (law of divorce).

ap die 3} » Gen. ii. 8 (Eden).

» iii 4 7 9 xlvii. 4; comp. xii. 10 (Israel’s guest-right in
eo EPE,

» (lil, 12 » Ex. xii, 11, 51, xili, 21, 22 (‘in trembling haste’ ;

Jehovah in the van and in the rear).

» liv. 9 (see » Gen. viii. 21, ix. 11 (the Deluge, and Jehovah’s oath).

note

» lvili. a 9 Deut. xxxii. 13 (‘riding over the heights of the land’).

y (lix. Io ” y) _ Xxvill. 29 (‘ groping like the blind’).

» Ixili. 9 » Ex. il. 24, iii. 7, xxili, 20-23 (Jehovah’s sympathy with
Israel, and the guidance of His Angel).

yy lxiii., 11 » Deut. xxxii. 7 (‘remembering the days of old’).

» lxili. 14 » Ex, xxxili. 14, Deut. iii. 20, xii. 9 (‘rest’ in Canaan).

» Ixv. 22 » Deut. xxviii. 30 (a promise modelled on a threat).

y xv. 25 » Gen. iii. 14 (dust, the serpent's food).

Notice also the mention of Sarah (unique outside the Pen-
tateuch) in li. 2, of Noah in liv. 9 (comp. Ezek. xiv. 14, 20),
and of the ‘shepherds’ of Israel (ze. Moses, Aaron, and
perhaps Miriam) in Ixiii. 11. These allusions to the Penta-
teuch in the disputed prophecies are a fact of some critical
moment ; not so much on account of their number (for such
references are not wanting in I. Isaiah) as of their phraseo-
logical exactness and of their referring almost, if not quite,
exclusively! either to Deuteronomy or to the portions of the
first four books of the Pentateuch commonly regarded (by
Delitzsch no less than by Knobel) as Jehovistic. I do not
wish to prejudge the still open questions relative to the
higher criticism, but am bound to give some indications of
the critical bearings of textual and exegetical data. A
study which has such a varied outlook on history as well as
theology ought not surely to be put aside as dull and un-
profitable.

The next group of parallels which invites us connects the
second part of Isaiah with Job. There are parallelisms, as
we have seen, between the first as well as the second part and
the Book of Job; but comparatively few. The illustrative
value of those which I have now to mention is so great that

1 The only exceptions which occur to me are the allusions in x1. 2 to Lev. xxvi. 41,
43 (a passage of a section of Leviticus—xvii.-xxvii—which presents striking resem-

blances to the Book of Ezekiel), and in liv. 9 to Gen. ix. 11 (Elohistic), which is, how-
ever, not certain (see my note).

250 ESSAYS.

a separate essay wili be required to unfold their significance.
Compare

Tse eve? with Job xxvi. 12, 13 (mythic expressions).

» li. 9, 10

6 wle2 » 9). -Vii. 11 (a ‘ warfare’ of trouble).

4 his t » 9: Xii. 2 (‘the people’ = mankind).

go oxlsra » 9 xxi. 22 (God’s perfect wisdom; He has no
teachers).

ge nklsagniod ! 99 9) -Xii.. 17-21 (God’s omnipotence shown in revolu-

45 XIV 2S tions).

a5 KF » ~~ 9)_—«*WAd. 23, xix. 7, 8, xxvii. 2 (complaints against Pro-

» xlix. 14 vidence).

yy xii, 14 » 9). Xxv. 6 (man likened to a worm).

sn MVE 24 » ix. 8. (God ‘alone stretched forth the heavens’).

» xiv.9 9). Xi. 2 (murmuring rebuked).

» L6 9 99,-—sCXiid. 4, «5, XVI. TO. xix. 18, 19, xxx. Io (humiliation
and scorn, the lot of the righteous).

Bde) 9» 9.‘ Xiii. 28 (human frailty ; a close verbal parallel).

e lit. 14,15 | 4, 4) ii. 12, Ps. xxii. 6 a@ (the unrecognisable form of
a ILS the righteous sufferer).

95 JL y» 99 Xix. 14 (desertion of friends ; verbal parallelism).
» lili g a » 9 XVie 17, Vi. 29, 30, xxvii. 4 (‘although he had

note) done no wrong,’ &c.).
» lix.4 » 9 XV. 35 (pernicious scheming ; a proverbial ex-
pression).
» xiii. 10 ~~ 99, ~<XXx. 21 (God ‘turning himself’ into an enemy).
» Lxiv. 5 » 9) Xiv. 4 (none without sin :—in Job /.c. render, ‘ Oh

for a clean one among the unclean !’).

Next come the parallelisms of the Psalms, on which I need
not delay long. They chiefly occur in the later psalms, the
authors of which may be truly said (as I have remarked, on
lii. 9, of the author of Ps. xcviii.) to have known II. Isaiah
‘by heart.’ Canon Elliott has given a list of the most striking
of these passages, and it will be noticed as a singular fact that
only one of them relates to the acknowledged prophecies of
Isaiah.! This of course does not prove that the latter part of
Isaiah was a work of recent composition—we know how long
it was after Shakspere’s death before his works received the
honour of quotation. It does, however, show that these later
prophecies exercised a special attraction upon post-Exile
writers, which is a fact of no small significance—The most
interesting parallels in the earlier psalms are undoubtedly
those in Ps, xxii, to which I have referred already (p. 203,
note), See also those relative to Jehovah’s ‘highway in the
desert’ (note on xl. 3), His care of ‘grey-headed’ Israel (on

1 Speaker's Commentary, vol. iv. pp. 506-512 (‘ Excursus on Psalms xci.-c.’), The
solitary parallel alluded to is that between Ps. xcix. 3, 5, 9 and Isa. vi. 3, by no means
one of the closest. Two parallels are given for Isa, xii., but the Isaianic authorship -

of this chapter is disputed on plausible grounds by Ewald and Lagarde, though ac-
knowledged by most critics,

ESSAYS. 251

xlvi. 4), ‘Rahab’ (on li. 9), ‘the loving-kindnesses of David’
(on lv. 3), and ‘the holy Spirit’ (on Ixiii. 10).
A large and important group follows. Compare

Isa. xiii. 19-22 | with Jer. 1. 39, 40 (Babylon ‘ overturned’ like Sodom ;
xxxiv. 14 desolate, and haunted).
yy XXXIV. 6,7 9) 99 xlvi. 10, 1. 27, li. 40 (Jehovah’s ‘ sacrifice,’ &c.).

” xl. 5, 6 . .

and pa-+ ,, 5, xii. 12, &c. (‘all flesh ;’ see vol. i. p. 245, col. 2).
rallels

xl. 12, 22 Pole ;

and pa-¢ 5, 4) X. 12 (description of creation).
rallels J

» XL 13,14 4) 9) xxiii, 18 (who is Jehovah’s counsellor ?).

» XL 18-20) 4, 4 X- 3-11 (Jehovah contrasted with the idol-gods,
and ge and an ironical description of the
rallels origin of the latter).

» xiii. 5 t 9» = XXX. *IO, xlvi. 27, 28 (‘my servant Jacob ;’ pro-

9 Xliv. 12 mises of restoration).

» xiv. 9 » 99. xviii. I-6 (the symbol of the potter).

gy XLVE I » 9» L 2 (gods of Babylon broken).

yy Xlvii. 1 » 9 Xlviil. 18 @ (‘sit in the dust’).

» Xlviii. 1 » 9 Iv. 2, v. 2 (true and false swearing).

yy xlviii. 6 9 = ):~SCXXXiii. 3 (See critical note above).

” ee 20 } » » 1 8, li. 6, 45 (‘Go ye out of Babylon ’).

yf Jule

fi xlix. I » 9» i 5 (predestination).

» Wie 15 » » xxxi. 35 (‘who stirreth up the sea, &c.; a quo-
tation).

» lv. 3 (see ’

note) » 9 xxxii., 4o (‘an everlasting covenant’),
lxi. 8

”

» lvi.g » 9 xii. 9 (‘wild beasts, come to devour’).
» vii. 20 «= «y)~—«Xiix. 23 (‘the sea which cannot rest’).
yy lviii, Ir » 99),-:~«<XXXi «12 (‘like a watered garden ).
» ixv.7 je gp EVE TS, oS as 18 (‘their recompence
rst’).
» Ixvi. 16 » » XXv. 31, 33 (‘holding judgment with all
flesh,’ &c.).

The number and closeness of these parallels (as compared
with those connected with I. Isaiah) is a phenomenon which
prepares us for the still greater abundance of parallel passages
in the post-Exile psalms. The fact is not without its bearing
on the ‘higher criticism.’!_ Some scholars have even offered
the hypothesis that, where the parallelism is the strongest (viz.
in Jer. x. 1, li), the text of Jeremiah has been interpolated by
the same exiled prophet who, as they suppose, was the author

1 On this subject see, besides the critical and exegetical works of Movers, Hitzig,
Graf, &c., Kiiper’s Feremias librorum sacrorum interpres atque vindex (Berl. 1837), or
better, the excursus in pp. 274-291 of his Das Prophetenthum des Alten Bundes (Leipz.
1870), and Caspari's ‘ Jesaianische Studien’ in the Zectschrift fur lutherische Theologie,
1843, pp. 1-73. Both these works discuss the relation of the disputed prophecies of

ne to the other prophecies between Isaiah and the Exile besides those of Jere-
miah,

o55 ESSAYS,

of Isa. xl.~Ixvi. This view (supported by the eminent names
of Movers and Hitzig) is too peremptorily rejected by Dean
Payne Smith,! who has perhaps not given much thought to
the complication of such critical questions. Each field of
philological inquiry calls peculiar faculties into exercise, and
our distinguished Syriac lexicographer would be the last
person willingly to put a stigma through his dogmatism on the
inquiries of some as conscientious, and even as reverent, as
himself. In the spirit of confraternity, I venture to protest
against the irritating and inaccurate statements which so
repeatedly occur in the Dean’s contribution to the Speaker's
Commentary, whenever he has occasion to deal incidentally
with questions of date and authorship. But I am not called
upon to arbitrate between the contending parties. Suffice
it to have indicated anew the variety of interest attaching
to the comparative study of the Ilebrew prophets.

The most important parallels to Ezekiel are suggested by
chaps. lvii-lix. of Isaiah. These chapters, it will be remem-
bered, stand out from the rest of the ‘Book of the Servant’
by their striking peculiarities of form and content. Indeed,
with regard to chaps. lviii—lix., the impression formed by
Ewald ? on stylistic grounds was so strong that he ascribed
them to a younger contemporary of Ezekiel. A general
impression cannot of course be analysed ; but the following
passages will at least establish the real affinity of these
chapters with Ezekiel :—

Isa. lvi. 1-8 comp. Ezek. xx. 11-21 (see above, p. 64).

» vig Ny » XxXiv. 8, XXXIX. 4.

” Ivii. 7,9 ”» x9 XXII. 40, 4T. ;

yy vill. 7 55 », Xvili. 7, 16 (works pleasing to God),
» lix. IF » » vil. 16 (‘mourning like doves’).

Asa rule the tone of Ezckiel is too different from that of
II. Isaiah to admit of much parallelism either of thought or of
expression ; he is rather a legal than an ‘ evangelical prophet.
Yet a few parallels may be traced. The description of Sheol
in Isa. xiv. 9, &c., closely resembles the dirge upon Egypt in
Ezek. xxxii. 18-32. Isa. xxvi. Ig may be illustrated from
Ezek, xxxvii. 1-10, Isa. li. 2 from Ezek. xxxiii. 24, and Isa,
li, 17 from Ezek. xxiii, 32-34.
The so-called Minor Prophets follow. Compare—

Isa. xxvi. 19

(see note) 4
yy Xiili. 12 » xiii. 4 (“no saviour beside me’).
yy lvil. 3 » 1. 2, il. 4 (spiritual adultery).

Hos. vi. 2 (Israel’s resurrection).

1 Speaker's Commentary, vol. v. pp. 387, 554+
2 The Prophets of the Old Testament, ng. Transl., vol. iv. p. 253+

ESSAYS. 253

Isa. Iviii. 1 Hos. viii. 1, Mic. iii. 8 (a mission to rebuke).

» xiii. 19 3 Am. iv. 11 (see my Jeremiah, introd. to chap. 1.).

yy) XXVi. 21 Mic. i. 3 (a strong anthropomorphism).

» XXIV. 23 » lv. 7 (Jehovah ‘become king’ in mount Zion),
» xii, 15 » iv. 13 (Israel’s threshing-time announced).

ay LVI 1,2 »»_ vii. I, 2 (the pious have become extinct).

» Xxili. 6, 9 Joel i. 15 (a striking assonance quoted).

» xliv. 3 » ii. 28 (the outpouring of the Spirit).

» Xlix. 23 yi. 27 (‘knowing Jehovah,’ &c.).

ipo ied » li. 17 (Jerusalem free from foreigners).

yy XXxiv. I Nah. ii. 11, A. V. 10 (assonances).

y li. 19 » iii. 7 (‘who condoleth with thee ?’).

» li, 20 yy» iii. 10 (a verbal parallelism).

9. Hie, 7 » iit, A.V. i. 15 (‘the feet upon the mountains,’ &c.).

xxxiv. 16

yy xiii, 21 } Zeph. ii. 14 (the desolate city).

yy XXXIV. II

» xlvii. 8,10 4, ii, 15 (‘I ‘and none beside’).

The critical importance of some of these parallels (viz.
those in Joel, Nahum, and Zephaniah) has no doubt been
exaggerated ; but no thoughtful person will disregard them.
They show how instinctively the prophets formed as it were
a canon of prophetic Scriptures for themselves, and also how
free they were from the morbid craving for originality. But
they have not the interest of the parallelisms in some of the
former groups.!

2.

Enough, I hope, has been said to show the value of a
careful examination of parallel passages, which is indeed a
great step towards the comparative study of the Old Testa-
ment. Here I might lay down the pen, were it not for certain
peculiar phenomena of the Book of Isaiah, which the student
is in some danger of overlooking. That Isaiah, taken as a
whole, has divergences as well as affinities relatively to other
books, none will be tempted to deny; but it is not every-
one who has a clear and single eye for discerning linguistic
differences within the Book of Isaiah itself. The prejudice
of the unity of authorship is of such a natural growth that
I seem bound in fairness to supplement my list of parallelisms
between I. and II. Isaiah by a corresponding conspectus of
the principal phrases and expressions peculiar, at any rate, to
the latter prophecies. To be absolutely complete, it would
no doubt be necessary to go further, and collect the words
and formule found in the acknowledged, but absent or rare

1 Mr. W. H. Cobb thinks he has proved the single authorship of Isaiah by show-
ing from the Concordance that the vocabulary of Isaiah xl.-Ixvi. (taken as a whole)
does not agree with that of the later prophets, Ezekiel, Haggai, Zechariah, and Mala-

chi (‘Two Isaiahs or One,’ Bibliotheca Sacra, 1881, p. 230, &c.), But no one has
ever identified ‘the Great Unnamed’ with any of these prophets.

254 ESSAYS.

in the disputed prophecies; in fact, nothing short of a
thorough analysis of the two parts of the book would enable
the reader to estimate the state of the evidence with mathe-
matical precision. Such, however, is not my object. I would
rather allure the student to work for himself with his Hebrew
Bible and his Concordance on the lines which I have marked
out ; and should indeed be somewhat afraid of weakening the
force of the more striking portions of the evidence by com-
bining them with those of less significance. Now, the most
essential of the linguistic peculiarities within the Book of
Jsaiah itself are those which meet us in the disputed pro-
phecies. The natural tendency is to accommodate [I. Isaiah
to I. Isaiah, volatilising the differences between them, rather
than vice versd; so that if, in pursuance of my object, a
selection has to be made, it will not appear strange if I devote
the remainder of this Essay to the peculiar words, phrases,
and forms of the disputed portion of the Book of Isaiah.

It has been said by Dr. Franz Delitzsch ‘that though
the disputed prophecies contain some things which cannot
be paralleled from the others, that which is characteristically
Isaianic predominates. ! Now, I admit that it requires great
nicety of judgment to determine such a point; but I must
confess that, after a careful revision of the data, I have come
to an opposite conclusion. Not that I suppose this conclu-
sion to carry with it the non-Isaianic origin of the latter pro-
phecies. If on general grounds it is probable that Isaiah in
his old age entered upon a new field of prophetic discourse,
it will appear natural ‘to suppose that new forms of expres-
sion should have met the promptings of his intellect. The
occurrence of numerous peculiar phrases and expressions in
II. Isaiah will only become a matter of primary importance,
should they warrant the inference that the author belonged to
a different linguistic stage from the historical Isaiah. Two
writers of the same period may conceivably differ very
widely in the character of their diction ; but it can hardly be
admitted that a writer, conspicuous for the purity of his
style in one prophetic book, should have sunk to a lower
level in another, while soaring higher than ever in thought
and imagination. My own opinion is that the peculiar ex-
pressions of the latter prophecies are, on the whole, not such
as to necessitate a different linguistic stage from the historical
Isaiah; and that consequently the decision of the critical
question will mainly depend on other than phraseological
considerations. Whatever may be said of the vocabulary

1 Der Prophet Fesaiu, 3te Ausg., p. xxxi.

ESSAYS. 255

of II. Isaiah, the general effect of the style, and still more the
character of the ideas, strike most readers as widely different
in the two parts of the Book of Isaiah. But more of this
elsewhere.

I. Among the most characteristic expressions of the latter
prophecies are—

(1) Those descriptive of the attributes of Jehovah, and
emphasising especially His uniqueness, eternity, creatorship,
and predictive power :—

(a) ‘I am Jehovah, and there is none else (or, beside),’
xlv. 5, 6, 18, 22, xlvi. 9.

(6) ‘ The First and the Last,’ xli. 4, xliv. 6, xlviii. 12.

(c) ‘To what will ye liken me?’ xl. 18, 25, xlvi. 5.

(2) ‘The creator of the heavens’ (xlii. 5, xlv. 18), ‘the
maker of everything’ (xliv. 24); comp. xl. 22 (xo¢e), xlv. 12.

(e) ‘Who announced (this) from the beginning,’ and pa-
rallel expressions. See xli. 26, xliii. 9, xliv. 7, xlv. 21,
xlviii. 14.

(J) ‘The arm of Jehovah,’ for the self-revealing aspect of
the Deity, xl. 10, and six other passages (see on xl. 10).

(g) The use of ‘ Holy One’ (Qéddsh) as a proper name,
xl. 25, lvii. 15, for which no doubt a point of contact may be
found in the characteristically Isaianic ‘Israel’s Holy One,’
comp. also ‘God, the Holy One’ (Aaggadosh, with the article),
v. 16, but which may by some be regarded as a later develop-
ment (it is only found elsewhere in a prophecy of the Baby-
lonian period—Hab. ii. 3, and in writings possbly belonging
to the age of the Captivity—Job vi. 10, Ps. xxii. 4).

(2) Equally characteristic is the ironical language of II.
Isaiah with regard to idolatry—see xl. 19, 20, xli. 7, xliv. 9-17,
xlvi. 6, and note the parallels referred to in my note on the
first-mentioned passage. In the acknowledged prophecies
idolatry does not receive a large share of the prophet’s atten-
tion, though contemptuous expressions, side-thrusts as it were,
are not wanting (ii. 20, xxxi. 7).

(3) So, too, is the abundant use of personification. Zion,
Jerusalem, Israel, constantly appear in the character of per-
sons. See on xl. 9, and comp. essay on ‘The Servant of
Jehovah,’

II. Passing to the vocabulary, let me mention (1) peculiar
words, and (2) peculiar significations, first reminding the
student that in order to estimate the importance of any single
instance, he will have to consider whether the word or the
signification is strictly peculiar to II. Isaiah,’ or whether it

1 Under the name ‘II. Isaiah’ I include aé/ the disputed prophecies—not merely
chaps, xl.-lxvi.

256 ESSAYS.

occurs elsewhere (though not in I. Isaiah), and if so, where
(the comparative study of the vocabularies of Job and II,
Isaiah would be a real critical and exegetical service). It
should also be borne in mind that lists similar to those which
follow might be made out for I. Isaiah. I have mostly chosen

words which occur but once in chaps, xl.-]xvi.! :
Sige xli. 9 pn xiv. 3
nsw — lili. 8 3x39 (plural) liii. 3, 4
DOWN lix. 10 nop —-(Nifal) li. 6
may hi. 7 anon iii. 3
PS) ‘to be impure’ (Nif. and ni me
, Hif.) lix. 3, Ixiii. 3 =pyp | lvl 19

pdx xiii. 4 a
ap) ‘to stir up (strife), liv. 15 ee er @)
ile “oe lix. 10 Bide ics

ae na lvi. Io
aa eee mma (plural) lix. 9
a ms lsvi. 5
piopn—ilxiv. I ae Me
mon ~~ xiix. 19 UNI Wii. Io . ss are
Saat Ixiii. 15 mr (Hifil) li, 15 (2); (Kal)
a1 xlvili, 22 Ixili. 3
bit xlvi 6 ny2—Asiii. 3, 6
rm Ixvi. IL ID xliv. 15, 17, 193 xlvi. 6
mt Ix. 3 }aD xii. 25
man iii. 3 bsp xliv. 25
ban liii. 3 12D (Pual) xl. 20
an x122 py Ixiv. 5
pon xlvili. 9 nosy xlvii. 8
pawn il. io ny 1.4
nan xlvili. 13 my xlvii. I
™)) (Hithp.) Ixi. 6 py = xlix. 26
oy Ixi. 10 anv (verb) Ixvi. 3
pow? — xiii. 19, 20 m5 xiii, 3
ns (verb and noun) xlii. 3, 4, | MVS sli, 14

Ixi. 3 nyp (always with Ay. or 437)

73 (Piel) xi. 10 xiv. 73 xliv. 233 xlix.
m3 (Piel) xliv. 5 5 xlv. 4 133 lig; liv.1;lv.12
bys Ixiii. 7 (repeated, lix. 18) | mypnpp xi. 1
pps xl. 2 p75 Ixv. 4
mn oii ay Ixvi. 20
m993 —sixvi. 20 q Ix. 45 Ixvi. 12
paws = xivii. 9, 12 my xii. II
m9 xli. 15 mmy xxiv, II
pny iii. 9 nbyy—sxsliv. 27

1 Th list, which is not complete, is based upon the invaluable Zusammenstellung
at the end of Nacgelsbach's Fesaiu.

ESSAYS. 257

py lviii. 3, 4 | amy xvii. 11

mvy¥ li. 145 Ixiii. 1 wow xl. 12

nyap li. 17, 22 aye liv. 8

Soe] xlv. 1 man xl. 14 (plur.), 28; xliv.
=>) (plural) xl. 4 19 (sing.)

yp (Piel denomnat.) xl.19 | MD%*.n xl. 20

To these may be added the following peculiar forms :—

(a) 10 (for 15) xliv. 15, liii. 8. (If, however, my view is correct, there
is an analogy for this in viii. 15, on which see crit. note, p. 141.)

(4) *Mis for +MY liv. 15 No doubt Aramaisms. The same usage

(c) pnis for pms lix. 21 | is found in 1 and 2 Kings, Jeremiah

and Ezeziel. It also occurs, however, in
Josh. xiv. 12 (perhaps Gen. xxxiv. 2),
where, as here, it may possibly be due to
a later editor.

(ad) ONIN for smbxan Ixiii. 3. An Aramaism.

(e) pina lii. 5. Hithpoal (with n assimilated).

(/) *2H9 lili. 10. Hif. from nbn (Aramaising), or from xbn, another
form of q$p (2 Chron. xvi. 12), with the final & omitted before
the initial & of the next word: for parallel cases, see 2 Kings
xiii. 6, Jer. xxxii. 35. So Olshausen, Lehrbuch, § 255 7, followed
by Klostermann and Delitzsch (ed. 3).

(g) s$x839 lix. 3. The form reminds one of the Rabbinic Nithpael ;
see, however, crit. note above, p. 159.

2. Words used with a peculiar shade of meaning. (Nota
complete list.)

(2) Ins < future time’ ; xli. 23, xlii. 23.

(6) ON ‘maritime lands of the west’; xlii. 15 (see note), and other
passages.

(c) IN ‘to test’ for yn, as in Aramaic ; xlviii. ro.

(d) 337 ‘to declare’? =‘to prophesy’ ; xiii. 12, xliv. 8, xlviii. 3.

(e) byn ‘the people’=‘ mankind’ ; xl. 7, xlii. 5, comp. xliv. 7.

(7) pram ‘to fix’ or ‘found’; li. 4.

(g) ppn ‘business, Iviii. 3, 13 (as in Ecclesiastes).

(2) Nn’ ‘abundance,’ used adverbially for ‘ exceedingly,’ lvi. 12.

(2) bp ‘interpreter’ =‘ prophet, xliii. 27.

(2) }DD ‘impoverished,’ xl. 20.

(2) DAWN ‘ ordinance’ or ‘law,’ used technically for (the true) religion
in its practical aspect; xlii. 1, 3, 4, li. 4.

(m) pywy ‘true’ ; xli. 26, comp. lix. 4.

n) pry ‘righteousness’ =‘ success’ (God’s justification of His people

l 8 . J . . .

before the world) ; xlv. 8, 24, xlvi. 13, li. 5, 6, 8, Ivi. 1, lix. 17,
Ixi. 10, 11, ]xil. 1.

(0) Np ‘to call’ =‘to. prophesy’; xl. 2, xliv. 7, lviii. 1, comp. Ixi. 1, 2.

Looking back upon the preceding lists, it is obvious that
VOL. Il. s

258 ESSAYS.

there is not only a large genuinely Hebrew element peculiar
to II. Isaiah, but also a certain Aramaising tendency. In
byy ‘to be impure’ we notice an Aramaic weakening of v
into 8 (comp. by; ‘to reject’). WwW3 ‘to grope,’ is suggested
by the Aramaic gash ‘ palpavit’ ; the genuine Hebrew synonym
is wwP (Deut. xxviii. 29, Job v. 14). Mt ‘exceedingly,’
reminds one of Aram. 1!; 7AM ‘business’ (a sense which
can hardly be avoided in lviii. 3, 13) of ¢d4# ‘business,’
in Syriac, from ¢dé ‘to desire,’ and 8?8Y¥ ‘a matter,’ in
Chaldee, from >¥¥ ‘to ask.’ 3D ‘to worship’ (which only
occurs in II. Isaiah) is the Syriac s’ged, Chald. s’gid, though
the use of the Hebrew word is more limited than that
of the Aramaic, 310 being only used of idolatry (§wv> and
other similar technical words of Aramaic origin are limited
in the same way). 33 ‘to give an honourable surname to’
(peculiar to II. Isaiah and Job), though it has both Aramaic
and Arabic affinities, is yet most probably suggested by the
Aramaic. 0°23D, ‘ viceroys,’ the Hebraised form of an Assy-
rian and Babylonian word (see note, p. 153), doubtless came
to the Jews through the Chaldee s’gax, plur. szgnzx (Dan. ii.
48, &c.). Add to these the harsh idiom in xxvi. 11 (see note),
which would lose its harshness in an Aramaic sentence ; and
the phrase ‘all nations and tongues’ (Ixvi. 18), which reminds
us of a well-known expression in the Chaldee portions of the
Book of Daniel (see note, p. 129). If the Massoretic text
were correct in xiv. 4, we should also include the singular
form 73079, ‘exactress of gold’ (Auth. Vers., margin), from
Chald. 233 Hebr. 373 ‘gold.’ And yet, when all has been
said, most will probably admit with Dr. S. Davidson! that
‘the diction of the second part of Isaiah is tolerably pure and
free from Chaldaisms. Sporadic Chaldaisms are in fact no
novelty in Hebrew literature, and with our very conjectural
knowledge of the phases of the Hebrew language, and the
process of the final editing of the Hebrew Scriptures, it seems
rash to trust to them as a decisive criterion of language. Cer-
tainly the case for the antiquity of II. Isaiah, on the linguistic
side, is more favourable than for that of the Book of Job, and
almost infinitely more so than for that of Ecclesiastes. We
must not, indeed, build too much on this comparative purity of
diction ; but, on the other hand, we must not fail to recognise it.

. Introduction to the Old Testament, ii. 54.

ESSAYS, 259

IX. JOB AND THE SECOND PART OF ISAIAH:
A PARALLEL.

I,

IF it is no easy task in the case of parallel passages to dis-
tinguish the original from the imitation, how much more
difficult must it be in the case of parallel bookst This reflec-
tion forms the link between the present and the preceding
essay. The allusion, I need hardly tell the reader, is on the
one hand to the ‘ Book of the Servant of Jehovah,’ and on the
other to the twenty-second Psalm and the Book of Job. It
is not my object, however, to discuss the literary relation be-
tween these books, but rather to show by a few details that
the parallelism actually exists. Nothing, perhaps, is more
helpful to a right appreciation of books than to compare those
which amidst some divergences have a real and predominant
affinity. The twenty-second Psalm, short as it is, embodies
the essence of some of the most striking passages of the
‘Book of the Servant,’ but I must content myself with the
brief enforcement of this view in a previous essay (pp. 203-4).
The Book of Job claims a fuller treatment, not with regard
to its literary aspects, however tempting these may be,! but
to the fundamental parallelism of thought between it and
II. Isaiah.

The common view that the hero of the poem of Job is
simply an individual must, it is clear, be abandoned. I do
not know whether Chateaubriand’s views on Biblical subjects
are original, or whether he drew from some Catholic theo-
logian; but his comment on the speeches of Job is too
strikingly true to be withheld. He says, ‘II y a dans la mé-
lancolie de Job quelque chose de surnaturel. L’homme znd?-
viduel, si malheureux qu'il puisse étre, ne peut tirer de pareils
soupirs de son ame. Job est la figure de Phumanité souf-
Frante, et ’écrivain inspiré a trouvé des soupirs, pour exprimer
tous les maux partagés entre la race humaine.? This is, in
fact, the thesis which the following pages are to defend, though
not without giving the fullest weight to the elements of the
poem which compel us to regard the hero as an individual.

1 T have touched upon these in a paper called ‘The Book of Job; a Literary and
Biographical Study,’ in Fraser's Magazine, July 1880, pp. 126-134. The parallelism
between Job and the Introduction to Proverbs has but little corresponding to it in IT.
Isaiah, the influence of proverbial wisdom upon the latter being comparatively slight.
ae aie both of thought and expression in the Book of Job is wider than that in

? Génie du christianisme (Paris 1802), ii. 305.
s2

260 ESSAYS.

The truth is that Job is at once an individual and a type:
need I remark how interesting a parallel is suggested with
the Servant of Jehovah?

But I must first of all invite the reader to accompany me
in a brief preliminary survey. I leave the Prologue for the
present out of the question, and turn at once to the speeches,
which, indeed, are capable of standing independently of both
Prologue and Epilogue. An analysis would occupy us too
long ; I will only point to the continually recurring passages
in which the sufferings of Job are spoken of in terms hardly
suitable to an individual. Sometimes, for instance, we are
startled at the ejaculation,

My days are swifter than a runner,
They have fled away without having seen prosperity (ix. 25),

although we have learned from the Prologue that ‘this man
was the greatest of all the sons of the cast’ (i. 3); and then
by still more excessive complaints, in which Job’s Oriental
sense of dignity seems to vanish altogether, and which must
sound strangely enough to those who have watched in real
life the calm heroism of great sufferers —

O that my vexation were duly weighed,

And my calamity lifted with it into balances !
For it would then be heavier than sand of seas 3
Therefore have my words been rash (vi. 2, 3).

How surprising it is again, when Job falls to meditating on
the hardships of humanity—

Has not frail man a hard service upon earth,
And are not his days like the days of a hireling? (vii. 1).

One would have thought that it would be some comfort to
the sufferer, that he was not worse off than the rest of his
kind! But no; it does but open the floodgates of lamenta-
tion—

Like a slave, who panteth for shade,

And like a hireling who waiteth for his recompence,

So am I made to possess months of disappointment,

And troublous nights have been allotted to me (vii. 2, 3).

And again, after the pathetic reflection,

Man, born of woman,

Short of days and full of unrest,

Cometh forth like a flower, and is cut down,
Fleeth like a shadow and stayeth not (xiv. 1, 2),

how hard it is, on the ordinary hypothesis, to account for the

ESSAYS. 261

(apparent) invasion of self-consciousness in the second line of
the next verse,

Yet upon him dost thou keep open thine eyes,
And me dost thou bring into judgment with thee (xiv. 3) !

Equally strange phenomena are the political and social
digressions in which Job repeatedly indulges. The changes
of empires, the violence of tyrants, and their immunity (not
universal, however, as Job virtually admits in chap. xxvii.)
from punishment, the hardships of slavery and poverty, the
calamities of war, pestilence, famine, and wild beasts, are
mingled inextricably with the personal theme of his unmerited
sufferings.

It is strange, no doubt ; but Job himself seems to give us
the clue to the mystery, when he and his friends unexpectedly
fall into language implying that he is not an individual, but a
plurality of persons. ‘For me the graves’ (Job; xvii. 1). ‘How
long will ye hunt for words,’ ‘Wherefore are we . . . held un-
clean in your sight’ (Bildad ; xviii. 2, 3). ‘He counteth me
as his adversaries’! (Job; xix. 11). Perhaps I might add, in
illustration, xvi. 10 and xxvii. 11, 12, where Job addresses
his friends as if they were the assembled multitude of ‘ wise
men.’ Certainly, I can see no other explanation of those
apparently hyperbolical complaints, that strange invasion of
self-consciousness, and that no less strange ‘enthusiasm of
humanity,’ of which I have spoken above, than the view ex-
pressed or implied by Chateaubriand, that Job is a type of
righteous men in affliction—not merely in the land of Uz, nor
among the Jews in Babylonia,? nor yet, on Warburton’s theory
of the poem, in the Judzea of the time of Nehemiah, but wher-
ever on the wide earth tears are shed and hearts are broken.
Not that Job ceases to be an individual; it is evident, not
merely from the Prologue, but from Ezek. xiv. 14, 20, that
there was an ancient tradition of a Hebrew king Priam, whose
name had become a symbol of immeasurable woe. That
Job is a type no more destroys his claim to be an individual
than the typical character of Dante in his pilgrimage and of
Faust in Goethe’s great poem annuls the historical element in
these two poetical figures. Job, in fact, if I read him aright,
is ‘not merely a patriarch in the already remote youth of the
world, but the idealised portrait of the author himself’? The
sacred poet, we may reverently conjecture, was prepared

1 See, however, above, p. 25 (foot of col. 2).

2 See on xl. 12 (vol. i. p. 247). :

3 The passages within inverted commas are quoted from the paper in Fraser's
Magazine, referred to above.

262 ESSAYS.

by providential discipline for his appointed work. ‘In the
rhythmic swell of Job’s passionate complaints, there is an
echo of the heart-beats of a great poet and a great sufferer,
The cry, “Perish the day in which I was born” (iii. 3), is a
true expression of the first effects of some unrecorded sorrow.
In the lifelike description beginning “Oh that I were as in
months of old” (xxix. 2), the writer is thinking probably of
his own happier days, before misfortune overtook him. Like
Job (xxix. 7, 21-25), he had sat in the “ broad place” by the
gate, and solved the doubts of perplexed clients. Like Job,
he had maintained his position triumphantly against other
wise men. He had a fellow-feeling with Job in the distress-
ful passage through doubt to faith. Like Job (xxi. 16), he
had resisted the suggestion of practical atheism, and with the
confession of his error (xlii. 2-6) had recovered spiritual peace.’
All this is credible, and more than credible, if we remember
that mere artistic creations are not in harmony with the old
Semitic mind—that personal experience is the basis of the
Biblical Hebrew as well as of the old Arabian poetry. This
is not, however, the only channel by which the author's subjec-
tivism has impressed itself on the traditional story. ‘There
is yet another aspect to the personality of the author of “ Job”
-—his open eye and ear for the sights and lessons of external
nature. He might have said with a better right than Goethe,
“What I have not gained by learning, I have by travel.”!
He is such a one as Sirach describes (Ecclus. xxxix. 4), “ He
will travel through strange countries, for he hath tried the
good and the evil among men.” From a wide observation
of nature he derived the magnificent scenery—scenery, how-
ever, which is more than scenery, for it furnishes important
elements of his sacred philosophy. Not that the imagination
is allowed to be inactive. . . . For the full and free considera-
tion of his subject, he felt that he required an absolutely: clear
medium, disengaged from the associations even of the true,
the revealed religion. (Is he not in this point a warrant for
the “apologetic” treatment to which we, like the author of
“Job,” though in other forms, are obliged to subject our re-
ligion?) With a poet’s tact, and with a true sympathy for
doubters, he created an ideal medium, in which hardly any-
thing Israelitish is visible. The elements which he fused
together came from the three countries with which he seems
to have been best acquainted— Arabia, Judah, Egypt. From
Arabia he takes the position which he assigns to Job, of a
great agriculturist-chieftain, The stars of the Arabian sky

1 ‘Was ich nicht erlernt habe, das hab’ ich erwandert.’

ESSAYS. 263

must have deepened his unmistakable interest in astronomy
(ix. 9, Xxxviii. 31-33). Personal knowledge of caravan life
seems to have suggested that most touching figure, which
our own Thomson has so finely, though so inaccurately, para-
phrased ' (vi. 15-20). And the same desert regions doubtless
inspired those splendid descriptions of the wild goat, the wild
ass, and the horse (chap. xxxix.) which extorted a tribute of
admiration from the traveller Humboldt. But neither agri-
cultural life alone, nor the phenomena of the desert, have fur-
nished him with sufficient poetic material. He who would
“rise to the height of this great argument ” must have gained
his experience of life on a more extensive and changeful
theatre. From Judah, then, the poet borrows his picture of
city-life, which presupposes a complex social organism, with
kings, priests, judges, physicians, authors, and wise men. This
description of the sessions of Job in the gate (chap. xxix.) is
distinctly Judzean in character. It was the Nile-valley, how-
ever, which supplied the most vivid colours to his palette.
He is acquainted with the Nile and its papyrus-boats (ix. 26),
with the plants which grow on its bank (viii. 11, xl. 21), and
with the habits of the two wonderful animals which frequent
its shores (xl, 15—xli. 34). He is no less familiar with mining
operations (xxviii. 1-11), such as were practised since the
earliest times by the Egyptians. But the author of “Job”
is no mere observer of details. Phenomena are in his eyes
but manifestations of the perfect and all-ruling but incompre-
hensible wisdom of God.’ No contrast can be greater than
that of the over-taught, sophisticated modern, who exclaims
with Leopardi,

‘ conosciuto il mondo
Non cresce, anzi si scema,

and the author of ‘Job,’ who beholds the universe with an
eye quickened by the thought of God. In him, the fountain
of admiration has not been dried up by an ill-assimilated
science. ‘Orion and the Pleiades above, the forests and the
torrents below ... the neck of the war-horse, the scales of
Leviathan, are marvels in his eyes—the speaking fragments
of an almighty life behind. From us, the wonder of these
things is gone’? But. the more we live ourselves into the
Biblical literature, especially into the inspired and inspiring
poem of ‘Job,’ the more the wonder comes back to us. ‘My
Father made them all.’

i In Cairo’s crowded streets
The impatient merchant, wondering, waits in vain,
. And Mecca saddens at the long delay.
(Summer, 980-2 ; of the caravan which perished in the storm.)
2 James Martineau, Hours of Thought, first series, p. 31.

264 ESSAYS.

The infinite wisdom of God—this is one of the sacred
poet’s two solutions (or substitutes for solutions) of the pro-
blem before him, How are the sufferings of Job to be recon-
ciled with the Divine justice? The other is embodied in the
Epilogue, which seems to have been appended by an after-
thought, either by the poet himself or by one of the Soferim
or Scripturists. It is this, that Job, after passing victoriously
through his trial, was restored to twice his former prosperity.
The two solutions are seemingly inconsistent: but are not so
in reality. The one applies to the case of Job both as an
individual and as a type; the other only as a type. The
sufferings of any innocent individual could not, at that early
stage of revelation, be accounted for; God is All-wise, was
the only thought which could quiet the troubled mind. The
same truth had, no doubt, its bearing on the sufferings of the
innocent as a class; but there was also another still more
comforting thought in reserve, viz. that they would yet receive
compensation ; they would ‘inherit the earth ;’ there would
be, in Christian language, a millennium. Now let us turn to
the Book of the Servant. The people whom the prophet
addresses (whether as a contemporary or across the centuries,
we need not here enquire) are preoccupied by the thought,
Why is redemption so slow in coming? And the answer is,
Because of your sins, especially your unbelief. Only a
righteous people can be delivered ; a people which trusts its
God implicitly, and devotes itself to carrying out His high
purposes. But how faint and dim the prospect of the people’s
ever becoming righteous! Hence (not to repeat my former
explanations) the inner necessity for a special Divine interpo-
sition. A divine-human representative must appear, and at
once atone for the breach of the covenant, and ‘make the many
righteous. And so the Servant, like another Job, appears on
the stage, and suffers more than even Job suffered, and through
his suffering wins the reward of eternal life for all who become
his spiritual children. The sufferings of the Servant are those
of an individual, but they are also those of the representative
of a class; his reward, too, is not merely that of an indivi-
dual, but purchased for a great company. This is, in brief,
the parallelism between the Book of Job and of the Servant
of Jehovah.

2.

Let me now briefly indicate some of the points of detail
in which this affinity can be traced.

1. Both Job and the Person in whom the predictions of
II. Isaiah culminate are Jchovah's righteous servants. ‘ Hast

ESSAYS. 265

thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him
in the earth, a blameless and an upright man, one that feareth
God and escheweth evil?’ (Job i. 8). ‘The righteous one,
my servant ’ (Isa. liii.9). Job has, indeed, a fault, but it only
appears in the course of his trial—he misinterprets the All-
wise Creator.

2. Both in the Prologue and in the body of the poem Job
is represented as a leper (ii. 7, vii. 5, 15, &c.). The sufferings
of the Servant in II. Isaiah are also described in language
suggestive of this fell disease (see on liii. 3,4). The leprosy of
the Servant is doubtless typical ; but so also is that of Job, if
at least we have been right in regarding Job as at once an
individual and a type. It is, moreover, worth noticing that,
in the pictures drawn by Job’s friend of the prosperity to
which he would be restored upon his repentance, and in the
narrative of the Epilogue, no allusion is made to his recovery
from leprosy. (See v. 17-26, viii. 5-7, 20-22, xi. 13-20, xxii. 2I-
30, xlii. 7-17.) May we not infer that the leprosy of Job was
in its highest meaning only one form of expression among
others for the manifold misery of ‘the woman-born’?

3. The horror with which Job’s appearance fills his friends
reminds one strongly of the similar effect of the disfigured
form of the Servant (see parallel passages in preceding essay).

4. The mockery and desertion by his friends of which
Job complains find a close parallel in the experience of the
Servant (see parallel passages).

5. Job is restored to more than his former prosperity ;
‘Jehovah gave Job twice as much as he had before’ (xlii. 10),
The Servant passes through trial to a glorious reward (liii. 12),
and the faithful remnant of Israel, which is mystically united
to Him, receives ‘double instead of its shame’ (Ixi. 7).

6. So near does Job stand to his God that he can inter-
cede effectually for his guilty friends (xlii. 8, 10). Of the
Servant the same is told us (liii. 12). We must not dilute
the parallelism, but neither must we exaggerate it. For the
Servant ‘makes intercession for the rebellious, ze. for the
breakers of the covenant, who had committed the ‘sin unto
death,’ for which none but a Divine intercessor is allowed to
pray (1 John v. 16).

7. Last of all (for I will leave some parallels for the stu-
dent to glean), let me mention the obvious correspondence
between the happy immortality anticipated by Job (xix. 25-
27) and the triumphant life after death of the Servant of
Jehovah (Isa. liii. 10-12).

It will be admitted that these are strong points of re-
semblance between the Books of Job and of II. Isaiah, and

266 ESSAYS.

especially between the portraits of the patriarch and of the
Servant. Some, indeed, as a learned Jewish Rabbinist! in-
forms us, have been so impressed by them as even to identify
these two personages. But if we will only look closely at the
portraiture, there are equally strong elements of contrast,
That luxuriant growth of imaginative ornament which twines
around the Book of the Patriarch has but a slender counter-
part in the Book of the Servant. The author of the latter
never forgets that he is a prophet, and though he does not
literally address the people in the market-place, his style is
chiefly modelled on that of the spoken prophecies. He does
not, indeed, refuse a large literary and, as one may say, poetical
element ;? writing in private, without any view to oral delivery,
he could not wholly exclude the graces of literature; but
there are times when, as in chap. lviii. 1-7,3 the reproduction
of the true prophetic style is so complete that we could be-
lieve ourselves standing in the crowd gathered round a pro-
phetic orator—Another consequence of his prophetic character
which equally distinguishes him from the poet of ‘Job’ is
his studious self-concealment. True, he does apparently refer
to himself on four occasions (xl. 6, xliv. 26, xlviii. 16, lvii. 21),
whereas the Book of Job contains no direct allusion to the
author ; but the four references to himself are in no sense
autobiographical, while the Book of Job is so eloquent in its
seeming silence that we can venture to read ‘between the
lines’ the life of the author himself. Whether the prophetic
writer of II. Isaiah had passed through such great deeps of
spiritual experience as the author of ‘Job, whether he took
as wide an interest in nature and in man, whether he was a
traveller, or had never moved from Jerusalem, we may feel
inclined to question, but cannot venture to pronounce dogma-
tically. It is of course possible that being a prophet anda
confessor, in picturing Him who was both and more than both,
he may to some extent have pictured himself ; but there could,
from the nature of the case, be no design in this partial co-
incidence. The vocations of the two writers were different,
though not unrelated. The author of ‘Job’ wrote as a theistic
moral teacher, excluding, for more than merely artistic reasons,
considerations drawn from revealed religion. ‘He has not,
indeed, solved, nor even tried theoretically to solve, the
problem of human suffering, but at least concentrated into
a focus the data for its discussion, so far as they could be

1 Dr. Schiller-Szinessy, Av F-xposition of Isaiah lii., &c, (Cambr. 1882), p. 5.

2 It is noteworthy that the affinity of ‘ Job’ with the Book of Proverbs has nothing
really corresponding to it in II, Isaiah,

5 See also note on xlviii. 6,

ESSAYS. 267

derived from the experience of his day. The author of II.
Isaiah wrote as an interpreter of the signs of the times to the
Jewish exiles, as an agent in the great work of preparation
for redemption, and as the final revealer of that wonderful
personage who should by his life and death explain all the
problems and fulfil all the aspirations both of Israel and
of humanity. But the one beyond question helped the other.
I cannot say with some recent writers! that the poet of ‘Job’
was ‘inspired’ by the prophet of II. Isaiah, for it can, I think,
be made reasonably certain that ‘Job’ is the earlier of the
two works, and that if any work has suggested the theme and
the mode of treatment of ‘Job’ it is, not II. Isaiah, but the
glorious little treatise (chaps i—ix.) which opens the Book of
Proverbs.2, Nor can I even adopt the converse of this pro-
position, and maintain that the Book of the Servant was
suggested by that of the Patriarch, for the influence of the
latter appears to me rather indirect than immediate, and the
author of the former to have immensely outrun his pre-
decessor :—how could it be otherwise when he was a prophet ?
But I do most fully admit the importance of the general and,
if I may say so, atmospheric influence of the Book of Job,
which must have contributed to a ‘fit audience, though few,’
most precious elements of thought preparing them for higher
truths. In a word, I think with Dr. Mozley that from a
Christian point of view this great work was the providentially
appointed pioneer of the supreme revelation of the suffering
Saviour. ‘If the Jew was to accept a Messiah who was to
lead a life of sorrow and abasement, and to be crucified be-
tween thieves, it was necessary that he should be somewhere
or other distinctly taught that virtue was not always rewarded
here, and that therefore no argument could be drawn from
affliction and ignominy against the person who suffered it.
The Book of Job does this. It devotes itself to the enunciation
of this injustice and irregularity as a law or principle of the
present order of things. However the mass might cling to
the idea of a visibly successful Messiah, such a book would
insensibly direct the minds of the better sort into another
channel, and prepare them for the truth of the case. It spoke
things dwvavta cuverotow, in describing the afflictions of one,
whom when the ear heard, it “ blessed him, and when the eye
saw, it gave witness to him; who delivered the poor that
cried, the fatherless and him that had none to help him.” 3

1 Seinecke, Der Evangelist des Alten Testaments (Leipz. 1870), and Hoekstra, in an
essay entitled ‘Job, the Servant of Jehovah,’ which opens the Theologisch Tijdschrift
for 1871,

2 See the paper in Fraser already referred to, pp. 129-130.

5 Job xxix. 11, 12.

268 ESSAYS.

And thus [to the few who had “ears to hear”] it stood in a
particular relation to the prophetic books of Scripture—a kind
of interpretative one ; supplying a caution where they raised
hopes, suggesting suspicions of apparent meaning and con-
jectures as to a deeper one, and drawing men from a too
material to a refined faith. By the side of a long line of
prophecy, as a whole outwardly gorgeous and flattering, and
promising in the Messiah a successful potentate, and opener
of a glorious temporal future for the Jewish nation, there rose
one sad but faithful memento, and all that appearance of ap-
proaching splendour was seen in qualifying connection with
other truths,’!

X. ISAIAH AND HIS COMMENTATORS.

I.

IT is an unfortunate custom which, though of modern origin,
promises to be difficult to eradicate—that of interpolating
exegetical observations with a long array of names of
authorities. In spite of the eminent precedents which may
be claimed on behalf of the practice, its extension is, I think,
very much to be deprecated. If, indeed, ‘ always, everywhere,
and by all’ complete unanimity were enjoyed as to the objects
and method of exegesis, we might safely allow the commen-
tator the same liberty which we grant the poet ; it is pleasant
to read a Miltonic roll of famous names. But in the unideal
conditions of human thought it is not open to us to make
light of the distinctions of ages and schools. To mix upa
St. Augustine with an Ibn Ezra, an Estius with a Calvin, a
Hengstenberg with a Hitzig, is equally offensive to the
historical sense and injurious to the exegetical student.
Perhaps the practical point of view is that from which one
may have most hope of disestablishing the custom; the
practical danger is too manifest to be ignored. Commen-
taries are not written primarily for the finished scholar, and
nine students out of ten are without a living conception of
what these bare lists of names symbolise. Not only are
their memories clogged with a useless skeleton of knowledge,
but their judgments are biased by a misplaced regard to
often very questionable authorities. Authority has no doubt
a value, but only to those who possess a clear insight into
the grounds of its existence. There are commentators whom

1 Mozley, Essays Historical and Theological, ii, 227-8,

ESSAYS. 269

we may gladly hear on a theological inference,’ but whose
opinion is of little or no importance on a point of grammar.
It is history which alone enables us to discern between
various charismata—the history, that is, of exegesis, which
is itself the history of philology, philosophy, and theology in
miniature.

It is impossible here even to sketch the outlines of these
three great subjects ; but some of my readers may thank me
for that elementary information which will vivify the few
names of commentators which I have thought it necessary
to mention. Besides, it is of consequence to the student not
to tie himself to any single commentator or school of com-
mentators. The Scriptures shine with a prismatic radiance,
and the gifts and perceptions of their expositors are equally
manifold. The richest stores of the intellect have been
lavished on the illustration of the prophecies, and it were
self-impoverishment to neglect to turn them to account. A
really good commentary on a many-sided author is never
quite superseded. Two or three representative works should
always be at hand, not as crutches for the indolent, but as
friendly guides to those who have already a preliminary
knowledge of the text. I speak here only of commentators ;
a special handbook is required for the versions, and in its
absence the Introductions of Bleek and Keil are familiar to
all. And I can say but little of the earlier exegetical writers,?
who would involve me in too many digressions, and, indeed,
like the versions, require a very special treatment. The
object of my work has been to place the reader in the centre
of the great modern exegetical movement, and it is on the
merits and demerits of those who have taken part in this
movement that the reader is entitled to expect a word of
guidance.

But how can I omit ST. JEROME, who in his seclusion at
Bethlehem laid the foundation of a philological exegesis, and
bridged over the gulf between the Synagogue and the Church ?
The only ancient Latin commentary on Isaiah comes from
his facile pen (A.D. 410). It is divided into eighteen books,
and, like this Father's exegesis in general, may be described

i 1 See e.g., the quotation from St. Athanasius in the supplementary note on
xlv, 14,

2 My plan prevents me from more than mentioning R. SAADYAH (892-942), born
in the Fayyam in Upper Egypt, who was one of the early lights of -]ewish-Arabic
philology, and whom I have referred to occasionally as a translator. His Arabic ver-
sion of Isaiah was edited in a very faulty manner by Paulus (Jenze, 1790-1), and will
be re-edited, it is hoped, by Prof. de Lagarde. Salomon Munk made important con-
tributions to a more accurate text in vol. ix. of Cahen’s great Bible (Paris, 1833). It
would be interesting to examine his commentary, which has been discovered (in Arabic)
in a new collection of MSS. in the St. Petersburg library, though, from his date and
theological position, we cannot expect it to be seriously philological.

270 ESSAYS.

with Dr. Merx as ‘eine fleissige, elegante, aber principlose
Compilation. Not the least valuable element in its multi-
farious contents is that derived from St. Jerome’s Jewish
rabbis (see his notes on i. 10, vi. I, vii. 8, xiii. 10, xiv. 19,
xx. 6); there are also golden grains in his geographical
and archzological notices (see eg. on dye xix. 6, and on
fv@os xix. 10).! Among Christian teachers, St. Jerome
probably owes much to Origen, like whom he expatiates
freely in the allegoric mysticism of ‘tropology.’ His merit,
however, and it is not a slight one, is this—he distinctly lays
down that ‘tropology’ must never violate text and context,
his tantim legibus circumscripta, ut pietatem sequatur et
intelligenti@ serimonisque textum,? and that the fundamental
sense of the Scriptures is the literal (fuxdamenta jaciens
Scripturarum)3 In the preface to the fifth book (on Isa.
Xlii.—xxiii.), written in a simpler style than usual at the
request of the bishop Amabilis, he even hazards a gentle
censure of his great predecessor Origen, who “beris allegorie
Spatits evagatur, et interpretatis nominibus singulorum in-
genium suum facit ecclesie sacramentas

The next great link between Jewish and Christian scholar-
ship was NicoLaAs Dr Lyra (died 1349), a Franciscan
monk at Paris, the author of Postz//e perpetue, in 85 books
(Benedictine edition, Antwerp, 1634). The well known
verse, ‘Si Lyra non lyrasset, Lutherus non saltasset,’> is
in reality a tribute to Jewish scholarship, for Lyra was so
largely dependent on Jewish exegesis as to receive the not
unmerited nickname ‘simia Salomonis’ (Rashi’s name being
properly R. Solomon Yigkhaki). Let us pay the debt of
gratitude to the name of Lyra, and be thankful that we are
not reduced, like Luther, to submit to his infiltration of
Jewish exegesis. Lyra’s great teacher, RASHI (died 1107),
was the glory of the rabbinical school of northern France.
He has left commentaries on nearly the whole of the Old
Testament, printed in the rabbinical Bibles, and partly
translated into Latin by Breithaupt (3 vols. Gotha, 1710).
His merits are thus summed up by Gratz the historian :—
‘His accurate tact and his sense of truth guided him to the
right meaning and the appropriate connection, Only he too
often allowed himself to be diverted by the Agadic exegesis,

1 Gesenius, Der Prophet Fesaia, p. 115.

2 Comment. in Abac, i. 11.

3 Preef in libr. quint. Is.
4 Jbid,

4 Or, ‘totus mundus delirasset.” There are also other forms of the couplet. With
regard to Rashi’s influence on Lyra and on Luther, see Dr. Siegfried’s papers in the
Archiv fir wissenschaftliche Erforschung des Alten Testaments, i. 428, &c., ii.

39, &e,

ESSAYS, 271

assuming that the exposition in the Talmud and in the
Agadic literature was meant to be taken seriously. Yet he
was conscious, though somewhat vaguely, that the simple
sense (0¥B) was the contradictory of the Agadic explanation
(wary). In his old age this consciousness became more dis-
tinct, and he expressed the intention to his learned grandson
and disciple (Rashbam) of recasting his commentaries on the
Bible in the sense of a sober, literal exegesis.’! A greater
genius than Rashi was the illustrious Abraham IBN EZRA
of Toledo (died 1167), poet, philosopher, theologian, and
exegete. His commentary on Isaiah (one of his earlier works)
has received the honour of a critical edition from Dr. Fried-
lander, who has appended a valuable glossary for the benefit
of those who are not conversant with the technical terms of
the rabbis, and who has also published a translation.2 As
Dr. C. Taylor, editor of The Sayings of the Fewish Fathers,
remarks: ‘The large class to whom the term Rabbinic
suggests a futile display of misapplied subtlety will see occa-
sion to revise their judgment after some study of the work
now presented to them in a comparatively popular form.’3
The obscurity of the author’s style is the chief drawback to
the perusal of his works in the original.

DavID KIMCHI of Narbonne (died 1235) was distin-
guished alike as a grammarian, a lexicogiapher, and an
exegete, though less by any original contributions of his own
than by his sound judgment, and his discriminating use of
the labours of others.

Of these three celebrated commentators, Ibn Ezra is
decidedly the most original, and it is not perfectly clear why
Dr. Merx denies him the capacity of historical criticism,‘
when he has certainly anticipated modern historical scepti-
cism (in the good sense) on such a salient point as the author-
ship of Isa. xl.-lxvi. Gesenius more plausibly complains of
the Jews for ‘preferring the superstitious and often crazy
Rashi to the clear-headed and thorough Ibn Ezra.’"* None
of them present us, however, with what we naturally look
for at supposed Messianic passages, viz. a. traditional Jewish
exegesis. Ibn Ezra is the most eccentric; many passages
commonly regarded as Messianic are explained by him from
the history of David, Hezekiah, &c., though he protests

1 Gratz, Geschichte der Fuden, vi. 73 Rabbi Eleazar, of Beaugenci, whose
Hebrew commentary on Isaiah has been edited by Mr, Nutt (1879), was a pupil of
Rashbam, the second grandson of Rashi.

? Published for the Society of Hebrew Literature by Triibner & Co., 1873 (trans-
lation), 1877 (text).

3 The Academy, Dec. 1. 1873, p. 451.

4 Die Prophetie des Foel (Halle, 1879), p. 255.

5 Der Prophet Fesaia, p. 123.

272 FSSAYS,

against being supposed to be a disbeliever in the Messiah’s
advent.' Kimchi is the most polemical; he loses no op-
portunity of expressing his horror at the idolatry of the
Christians (0), But a common ‘Jewish interpretation
of prophecy’ is altogether wanting ; the most striking proof
of this is the thick octavo volume in which the comments of
Jewish writers on the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah were
brought together by Dr. Neubauer and Mr. (now Prof.)
Driver at the instance of the late Dr. Pusey. There was
evidently no tradition, no rule of interpretation, to bind
the Jewish rabbis. All that we have in this admirably
edited work is the anti-Christian interpretations of individual
Jews, ‘privatmeinung, notbehilf, abfindung mit christlicher
theologie.’?

To return to Christian exegesis. It is sad but true that,
by the unhistorical antedating of ‘unwritten traditions,’ the
Roman Catholic Church has done its utmost to cut the nerve
of historical exegesis. It has even, by its declaration of the
‘authenticity’ of the Vulgate (without, however, providing a
critical text of that version), and by the ominous decree, ‘ad
coercenda petulantia ingenia,’ made it practically all but
impossible to be, even in the most humble sense, an exegete
of the original texts.3 Mon ragioniam adi lor, we must say
but in a very different tone from the stern Florentine, ma
guarda e passa. The leaders of the Reformation took a
directly opposite attitude. They appealed, in the interest,
as they believed, of spiritual religion, from an unverifiable
tradition to the text of the sacred Scriptures, and the study
of the Bible immediately rose to a position of primary
importance. Exegesis, without becoming less Christian, be-
came distinctly more scientific. In the Old Testament, for
instance, the Protestant divines sought to harmonise their
exegesis, not merely with their Christian assumptions, but
with the rules of the new philology. The atomistic mode of
treatment gave way to a patient, thoughtful study of contexts,

1 Friedlander, Fssays on the Writings of Abraham Ibn Ezra, p. 98.
‘ Lagarde, Symmikla, vol. ii. (Gotting. 1880), p. 13.

. . . Perspiciensque hanc veritatem et disciplinam contineri in libris scriptis
et sine scripto traditionibus, quze ab ipsius Christi ore ab apostolis acceptae, aut ab
ipsius apostolis, Spiritu Sancto dictante, quasi per manus tradita, ad nos usque
pervenerunt.’ ‘Praeterea, ad coercenda petulantia ingenia, decernit, ut nemo, sue
prudentize innixus, in rebus fidei, et morum ad eedificationem doctrine christian
pertinentium, sacram scripturam ad suos sensus contorquens, contra eum sensum,
quem tenuit et tenet sancta mater ecclesia, cujus est judicare de vero sensu et interpre-
tatione scripturarum sanctarum, aut etiam contra unanimem consensum patrum ipsim
scripturam sacram interpretari audeat, etiamsi hujusmodi interpretationes nullo
unquam tempore in lucem edendz forent’ Canones Conctlii Tridentini, Sessio
Quarta, (I fail to see how the former quotation is reconcileable with any theory of

historical development, or how the art of exegesis is ever to be practised either by
master or by scholar with such a sword of Damocles suspended over his head.)

ESSAYS. 273

The reaction against dogmatic accretions inspired a whole-
some dread of the licence of allegory. A growing distrust
set in of the manifold senses of the older expositors ; in fact,
one of the greatest dangers of Protestant exegesis became the
identification (so unnatural, if it be understood extensively, and
not intensively) of the literal interpretation with the Christian.
I speak, of course, merely of tendencies, not of accomplished
results.

It was in the Reformed Church, which attached greater
importance than the Lutheran to the authority of the Scrip-
tures on a// points of doctrine, that the problem of Biblical
exegesis was apprehended with most distinctness. Mus-
CULUS, however (whom I have had occasion to cite once),
has been praised by a competent judge for his careful dis-
tinction between the scientific and the practical elements
of exegesis, and his special attention to the former ;!' and
Musculus was an adherent of the doctrines of Luther. In
the Reformed Church the name of the ardent Hebraist PEL-
LICANUS deserves honourable mention, as we have been
reminded by a recent discovery in our national library.2 His
notes upon Isaiah, which are concise, and mainly devoted to
paraphrasing the grammatical sense, occur in the third volume
of his Commentaria Sacra (Zurich, 1540). But the only
writer of this age who still retains, and is likely to retain, his
importance is CALVIN (1509-64). ‘ Unrivalled in his own
age, says Diestel, ‘his works offer even yet a rich store of
Biblical knowledge.’* Mercerus* was no doubt a far deeper
Hebraist (though the scholarship of Calvin has been most
unduly disparaged by Richard Simon), but if we consider
Calvin’s deep insight into the aim and method of historico-
philological exegesis, the extent of his exegetical labours, and
the high average level which, in spite of the enforced rapidity
of his work, he attained, we shall probably come to the con-
clusion that, even as an Old Testament interpreter (and he is

1 Musculus: Jz FEsaiam prophetam commentarii locupletissimz, Basil., 1570.
oe Diestel, Geschichte des Alten Testamentes in der christlichen Kirche (Jena,
1869), p. 268.

? pellicanus was the predecessor of Reuchlin as a writer on Hebrew grammar.
The story of his exertions to learn the sacred tongue can be read in his autobiography,
edited by Professor Riggenbach for the festival of the fourth centenary of the Uni-
versity of Tiibingen, in 1877. His Grammar (entitled De modo legendi et intelligendi
Hebreum) was lost sight of, till Dr. E. Nestle discovered it in the British Museum
‘copy of the 1504 Strasburg edition of Reisch’s Margaritha philosophica, of which
Pellicanus’s Hebrew Grammar forms part. A photo-lithographic reproduction of this
curious work was brought out by the discoverer in honour of the Tiibingen festival.

5 Diestel, of. cit. p. 267.

4 Mercerus (Le Mercier) was, although a Huguenot, regius professor of Hebrew at
Paris. He died 1570. Schlottmann calls him ‘the greatest Old Testament exegete
of the sixteenth century’ (Das Buch Hiob, p. 121). It is to be regretted that he has
left no commentary on Isaiah,

VOL. II z

274 ESSAYS.

more than this), there is no greater name in the Reformation
age (nor perhaps in any subsequent one) than that of Calvin,
It is indeed remarkable that one so eminent as a dogmatic
theologian should also have shown himself so loyal to the
principles of philology. The only apparent effect of his
dogmatic speculations upon his Biblical exegesis is to give
it a greater depth. The most celebrated specimen of his
exegesis is his commentary on the Psalms, of which it is
hardly possible to speak too favourably ; but even his work
on Isaiah,! though neither so mature nor so elaborate, well
deserves to be consulted. It certainly gives one a high idea
of the exegetical lectures—not by any means confined within
a narrow range—which this great Reformer was constantly
delivering to the future ‘ministers of the word of God.’

In the seventeenth century the centre of Biblical studies
was transferred to Holland. The national characteristics of
coolness, good sense, and thoroughness appear in the Dutch
exegesis: let it suffice to mention GROTIUS and DE DIEv.
The former (1583-1645) was primarily a statesman and a
jurist. His peculiarity as an exegete consists in his
thoroughly secular attitude towards the Biblical writings ; he
writes as a layman for laymen. Of the depth of meaning of
the Scriptures he has noreal comprehension ; but he has done
yeoman’s service for the letter. He wrote ‘annotationes’
in the strict sense of the word—ze. scattered, unconnected
notes on certain difficult passages— extending over the whole
of the Old Testament, including the Apocrypha. De Dieu
(1590-1642) excels where Grotius is deficient, as a grammarian
and a lexicographer ; he not only sifted the vast and multi-
farious Rabbinical tradition, but actually advanced Hebrew
philology by an independent comparison of the cognate
languages.2. He had also a keen and subtle judgment, and
stimulates even where he does not convince. Well qualified
as he was, however, he seems to have objected on principle
to add to the number of continuously written commentaries ;
he has therefore only given us a spzczlegium. Nor did any
of the great Orientalists (not even our own Pococke), who
formed a kind of philological ‘succession’ in the seventeenth
and the early part of the eighteenth century, choose the
prophet Isaiah as the subject of special study. ALBERT
SCHULTENS (1686-1750), who has left an ineffaceable mark

1 Printed at Geneva, 1551, and dedicated to King Edward VI.

2 See his posthumous work, Animadversiones in Veteris Testamenti libros omnes
(Lugd. Bat., 1548), a short extract from which is given in crit. note on xliii. 27.

3’ Bochart, the French Protestant (died 1667), only touched on antiquarian and

especially zoological allusions ; here, however, he shows vast reading. His works are
-—Geographia sacra, Caen, 1646 ; Hierozoicon, London, 1663.

ESSAYS. 275

on Hebrew philology, confined himself, like De Dieu, to
observations on difficult passages,! which, though highly
praised by Gesenius, require to be read with caution, on
account of the author’s illusion as to the illustrative value of
the Arabic vocabulary. It was, however, a remarkable pro-
duction for a youth of twenty-three, and reminds us forcibly
of the early achievement of one of his greatest successors.

In 1722 the academic world of Franeker was gathered in
the university church to listen to an oration from Albert
Schultens ‘in exequiis przncipis theologi Campegii Vitringa.’
There is a refreshing enthusiasm in VITRINGA? (‘ardens,
vehemens, et nobile quid ac magnificum spirans, are the
epithets of his friend Schultens) which makes us wonder
whether he can be really the countryman of Hugo Grotius.
But this ardour is not inconsistent with a love of completeness
and an dxpiBea, which have always characterised the best
type of Dutch philology. One is tempted to add, with a
prolixity peculiar to himself ; for who else in a land fruitful
above others in philologists would have thought of devoting
two folio volumes of 710 and 958 pages respectively to a
commentary on a single author of no great length? Not
that Vitringa is properly chargeable with verbosity, but that
he has the cheerful faith that all truth is divine and therefore
reconcilable, and not enough intellectual independence to
sift the pretensions of all the claimants of that sacred name.
His exegesis is, in a word, involved in an ‘infinita sensuum
silva, if I may borrow an expression from St. Jerome, who
would certainly not have recognised his own type of tropology
in Vitringa’s. The mitigation is that the various senses and
fulfilments of the prophecies are carefully kept asunder, and
that no pains are spared to explain and illustrate the primary
grammatical sense and historical background. Vitringa was,
for his day, a fine Hebrew and especially Rabbinical scholar,
and his commentary is a mine of learning, and even of sound
sense, which may still be worked with advantage. His
preface on the aims and methods of prophetic exegesis is a
brilliant piece of modern Latin composition, and reveals the
author as equally fervent in his Christianity and profound in
his erudition. Only one remembers the very different ideal
of a commentary in Calvin’s golden preface to his work on
the Romans, and sighs at the two folio volumes! _

Vitringa is a specimen of the late summer of Continental

1 Schultens, Alb.: Aximadversiones philologice et critice ad varia loca Vet. Test.
Amstelod., 1709.
Vitringa : Commentarius in Librum Prophetiarum Fesaie, &c. Tomi duo,
Leovardiz (é.e. Leuwarden), 1714-20, and 1724.
T2

276 ESSAYS.

orthodoxy ; it is natural that when England has her word
to say, it should be marked with the secularity of the English
eighteenth century. ROBERT LOWTH (1710-1787), Professor
of Poetry at Oxford, by his lectures on the sacred poetry of
the Hebrews (first edition, 1753) began that important
zstheticising movement in Biblical criticism which, with all
its faults and shallowness and sometimes perhaps irreverence,
fulfilled (one may venture to surmise) a providential purpose
in reviving the popular interest in the letter of the Scriptures,
What Lowth began was continued with far greater ability
and insight by Herder; but an Englishman may be proud
that Lowth began 11. The principles which he thus introduced
to the world were further exemplified in his translation of
Tsaiah,' in which the English text was for the first time
arranged according to those rules of parallelism, not, indeed,
discovered, but first brought vividly home, by the Oxford
professor. A iong preliminary dissertation re-states the
principles and characteristics of Hebrew poetry, and does
justice to the acute Rabbi Azariah de’ Rossi (1513-1576), who
‘treated of the ancient Hebrew versification upon principles
similar to those above proposed, and partly coincident with
them.’ The chief faults of the translation are, not certainly
its fidelity, nor yet (if I may venture to differ from Dean
Milman *) its inharmoniousness, but the inappropriate selection
of a Latinised vocabulary, and further, from a critical point
oi view, the recklessness with which the translator treats the
Massoretic text. There was, indeed, an epidemic of arbitrary
emendation in the air, and Lowth did but follow the example
of Cappellus and Houbigant (comp. p. 238). I do not deny,
however, that he has often considerable reason for his changes ;
it is rather his inconsiderate haste, which gives him so much
the appearance of holding a brief against the traditional text.
Where he is most probably right, the discovery is often not
due to himself, but to one or another learned friend, especially
the recently deceased Archbishop Secker. His emendations
were examined more or less successfully by David Kocher in
a small volume of Vznxdici@ (Berne, 1786). The Bishop's
notes partly justify his emendations, partly illustrate the

1 fsaiah, A New Translation, with a Preliminary Dissertation and Notes,
Critical, Philological, and Explanatory, \.ond. 1778.

? Dean Milman complains of the Bishop for having ‘forgot en that he was trans-
lating a poct, and having -chiiled Isaiah down to the flattest—correct perhaps—but
unreheved, inhirmonious prose’ (Aznals of St Paul's p. 468). Vhe Dean had
evidently ot read the ‘preliminary dissertation in which the translator simply claims
the merit of fidelity. To be at once literal and elegant or harmonious is surely im-
possible. Gcsenius. with whom the Dean compares Bishop Lowth unfavourably, is
certainly not ‘harmonious,’ but he has this great advantage over the Bishop, that his
vocabulary is simple and natural. The Latinised style of high society is the most
unfitted of all for a Hebrew prophet.

ESSAYS. 277

text from classical poets and modern travellers. He does
not go deeply into the fulfilment of the prophecies, but in
the main adopts the ordinary Christian view without dis-
cussion. His exposition of the prophecy of Immanuel is,
however, sufficiently peculiar to deserve quotation. After
stating that ‘the obvious and literal meaning’ is zot Messianic
(he explains ‘the virgin’ to mean ‘one who is now a virgin’),
he continues :—

‘But the prophecy is introduced in so solemn a manner ;
the sign is so marked, as a sign selected and given by God
himself, after Ahaz had rejected the offer of any sign of his
own choosing out of the whole compass of nature ; the terms
of the prophecy are so peculiar, and the name of the child so
expressive, containing in them much more than the circum-
stances of the birth of a common child required, or even
admitted ; that we may easily suppose that, in minds pre-
pared by the general expectation of a great Deliverer to
spring from the house of David, they raised hopes far beyond
what the present occasion suggested ; especially when it was
found that in the subsequent prophecy, delivered immediately
afterwards, this child, called Immanuel, is treated as the Lord
and Prince of the land of Judah. Who could this be, other
than the Heir of the throne of David, under which character
a great and even a Divine person had been promised ?’

Both the works of Bishop Lowth were translated into Ger-
man, and, with the notes of Michaelis and Koppe, were, for
good or for evil, among the revolutionary influences of that
unsettled age in Germany. The words of Dean Milman are
therefore true in their fullest sense of the great critical Bishop,
that his inquiries ‘make an epoch unperceived perhaps and
unsuspected by their author,’!

2.

If Calvin is the predominant figure in the Old Testament
exegesis of early Protestantism, the modern period may
without any substantial injustice be said to date from
GESENIUS (1785-1842). Himself a rationalist of the old
school, and a zealous promoter of the rationalistic movement
in his university, it is not surprising if his exegesis fails to
satisfy the deeper requirements of our time. He honestly
thought that to allow predictions in the Old Testament was
to degrade the prophets to the rank of soothsayers, and
that a ‘ Christian interpretation’ was only attainable by doing
violence to philology. The truth is that he was more of a

1 Annals of St, Paul's, 2nd ed., p. 467.

278 ESSAYS.

philologist than a thcologian; a susceptibility for religious
ideas was still dormant in his nature. In two respects, how-
ever, he marks an advance; he absolutely repudiates the
shallow and now antiquated estheticising of the disciples of
Herder, and the extravagant disintegrating criticism intro-
duced by Lowth’s editor, Koppe,' which, ‘ whenever the prophet
stopped to draw breath, and the discourse surged up anew,
fancied it discovered the patchwork of uncritical collectors,’
His great work on Isaiah is hardly yet superseded ; it marks
precisely the point which historical and archeological research
had attained at the date of its composition. It contains also
much lexicographical information ; and if it entirely neglects
the prophetic teaching, this is at any rate better than mis-
representing it. The dates of Gesenius’s chief works are:
Hebrew Grammar, first ed. 1813; Isaiah, 1821; Thesaurus,
vols. 1.—iil. fasc. 1, 1835-42, completion by Roediger, 1852-58.
HITZIG (1807-1875) resembles Gesenius in his rationalism
(Paulus and Gesenius were his earliest academic teachers),
which he ever expressed with the most fearless sincerity.
The refined monotheism of the Old Testament was discovered,
according to him, by superior intellectual vigour? (durch eine
starkere Denkkraft); but the intellect of the Israelites, he
thinks with Lassen and M. Renan, was singularly limited,
and Old Testament prophecy is an illusion produced by the
objectifying of the higher self. In exegesis, however, Hitzig
displays a rare grammatical sense, and a tact for eliciting the
connection, though his explanations are sometimes charge-
able with over-subtlety. Of reverence there is of course no
more trace than in Gesenius, but his more flexible intellect
enables him to sympathise more keenly with transitions of
thought and feeling. His discussions of the historical back-
ground of the prophecies are in their way equally remarkable,
and his acuteness in combination extorts admiration, even
where it fails to produce conviction. Criticism to him is no
merely destructive power (as it was in the main to De Wette).
Both in the criticism of the text and in that of history he
aimed at positive results, though he was under a great illu-
sion as to the invariable trustworthiness of his methods. His
faults are, however, less conspicuous than his merits in his
1 £.g. in his introduction to chap. i,, where he opposes Koppe, who divided the
chapter into three unconnected pieces on the ground of alleged irreconcilable differ-
ences between the descriptions of the internal state of the nation. Lagarde, it may be
here noticed, in his note on chap. i. in Sem //ica i,, simply follows in the wake of Koppe,
except that he supposes the disintegrated fragments to be not complete in themselves,
but portions of longer discourses now lost. He offers no discussion of the historical
backgrounds proposed for the chapter.

2 Geschichte des Volkes Israel (Leipz. 1869), p. 82.
3 Der Prophet Fesaja, Allgemeine Einleitung, p, 246

ESSAYS. 279

early commentary on Isaiah (1833), dedicated to Heinrich
Ewald, his still youthful teacher, whose grammatical labours
he was the first to appreciate and to utilise.

EWALD’s governing idea was that of reconstruction. It
was no doubt also that of his period; we find it in Hitzig,
but not so strongly developed as in Ewald. As a theologian,
he partook (unlike Hitzig) in that yearning for a deeper
religion which accompanied the great rising of the German
nation; but he never succeeded in dissipating a certain
luminous haze which blurred the outlines of his religious
ideas. As a philologist, he takes the highest rank. By his
Hebrew Grammar he earned from Hitzig the title of ‘second
founder of a science of the Hebrew language, and Professor
Pusey cordially admits the ‘ philosophical acuteness’ whereby,
as he says, ‘as a youth of nineteen (? 24) he laid the founda-
tion of the scientific treatment of Hebrew grammar.’! As an
interpreter of the prophets (it would take too long even to
touch upon his other labours), he reminds us somewhat of
his master Eichhorn, whose poetic enthusiasm he fully shares,
though he holds it in check by a strong sense of the pre-
dominantly religious character of the prophetic gifts. His
style has something in it of Orientalism,? which conveys a
deep though vague impression of the grandeur and beauty of
prophecy ; his translation of the prophets has a rhythmic
flow, which, though at the cost of elegance, gives some faint
idea of the movement of the original. His distinctive merits
appear to be threefold :—1. He starts with a conception of
prophecy derived from the prophets themselves. This con-
ception is no doubt vague and indefinite, for he totally ignores
the New Testament ; but it is at any rate free from the
anti-dogmatic theories of the rationalists. 2. He has the eye
of an historian, and treats the prophetic literature as a whole.
No critical theory (as I have suggested already) can be
properly estimated until we see how it dovetails into the
author’s scheme of the historical development of the Old
Testament literature. 3. He bestows special care on the
connection of thought, though his over-subtle views of
Hebrew syntax may have sometimes led him beyond the
borders of the natural and the probable. I might, perhaps,
add a fourth merit—his conciseness. He spares his reader

1 The Minor Prophets (Oxf. 1879), p. iii. F

2 Karl Hase, himself a rationalist of a more cultured school than Gesenius and
Hitzig, has given one of his medallion portraits of Ewald. ‘Nach Gesenius hat
Ewald die Geschichte des alttestamentlichen Volkes aufgerollt, er ein riickschauender
Prophet mit der orientalischen Zungengabe, kiihn und zu Opfern bewahrt fiir die Frei-
heit, nur durch seine sittliche Entriistung gegen jede abweichende Meinung leicht

verstort'' (Kirchengeschichte, p. 582),

280 ESSAYS.

those wearisome discussions of rejected opinions which render
so many German works unreadable. He even disdains the
help of archeological and historical illustrations, and confines
himself mainly to that which he regards as essential, viz. the
prophetic ideas. His faults, too obvious to need a long de-
scription, are an overweening self-confidence, an excessive
predilection for minute systematising, and a lack of dialectic
power which often prevents his reader from discovering the
real grounds of his theory (how unlike, in this latter respect,
one of his most influential successors—the author of the
Religion of Israel!). The following are the dates of Ewald’s
chief works (a complete list would occupy nearly three
pages) :—Hebrew Grammar, first ed., 1827, fifth edition re-
cast, 1844, Die Propheten des alten Bundes, first ed., 2 vols.,
1840-41, second ed., 3 vols., 1867-68 ; the same translated in
five volumes, 1875-81.

It is not surprising that the shallowness of Gesenius and
Hitzig, and the vagueness of Ewald, were profoundly ob-
noxious to those who resorted to the Scriptures for supplies
of spiritual life. Even had the new exegesis been free from
theological objection, it would have required unusual strength
of faith to admit in practice (what all admit in words) that
our knowledge of the sense of revelation is progressive. ‘It
is not every interpreter who is able, like Luther and Calvin,
to place his novel views in a light which shall appeal as
strongly to the religious experience of the Christian as to the
scholarly instincts of the learned. The rise of new difficulties
is as essential to the progress of truth as the removal of old
puzzles; and it not seldom happens that the defects of
current opinions as to the sense of Scripture are most palpable
to the man whose spiritual interest in Bible truths is weak. . .
Thus the natural conservatism of those who study the Bible
mainly for purposes of personal edification is often inten-
sified by suspicion of the motives of innovating interpreters ;
and even so fruitful an idea as the doctrine of a gradual
development of spiritual truth throughout the whole course
of the Bible history has had to contend, from the days of
Calvin down to our own time, with an obstinate suspicion that
nothing but rationalism can make a man unwilling to find
the maximum of developed spiritual truth in every chapter
of Scripture! Only by such feelings as these can we ac-
count for the almost unvarying opposition of HENGSTENBERG
(1802-69) to the new criticism and exegesis—an opposition, I
must add, intensified by his editorship of a Church news-

1 Prof, Robertson Smith, British and Foreign Fuangelical Review, July 1876,
P. 174- :

ESSAYS. 281

paper,’ which kept him in a continual atmosphere of party strife.
Anxiety for his personal religion, which he had learned in
the school of trial, and not of this or the other theologian,
converted the youthful Hengstenberg into an ardent cham-
pion of revelation, and a certain heaviness of the intellect
(which no English reader of his works can fail to observe) made
him regard any attempt, such as Bleek’s, at a via media, as
sophistry or self-delusion. Hengstenberg had no historical
gifts, and never seems to have really assimilated that doctrine
of development which, though rejected by Pietists on the one
hand and Tridentine Romanists on the other, is so profoundly
Christian. He was therefore indisposed to allow the hu-
man element in inspiration, denied the limited nature of the
Old Testament stage of revelation, and, as Dr. Dorner
has pointed out,? made prophecy nothing but the symbolic
covering of the eternal truths of Christianity. These seem
to Dr. Dorner grave faults, which seriously detract from the
value of Hengstenberg’s exegesis. And yet it should be
borne in mind that the rationalistic exegesis had been equally
one-sided, and with results far more dangerous. Even from
a scientific point of view, it was desirable that the old cri-
ticism and exegesis should be once re-stated in a modern
dress, lest perchance in the hot haste of the innovators certain
precious elements of truth should be lost. I do not think
that there is much in Hengstenberg which cannot now be
found in a more acceptable form elsewhere ; and his works
are but ill translated. But it may be well for the student
at least to dip into the Christology of the Old Testament}
which is still the most complete expression of the theory
which interprets the Old Testament solely and entirely in the
light of the New.

Hengstenberg’s exegesis of Isaiah was confined to the
Messianic passages ; but a devout and thoughtful commen-
tary on the whole of the book was begun in the same spirit
by DRECHSLER,! and, on his death in 1851, completed by
August Hahn, with an important appendix by Franz
Delitzsch, indicating the thread of thought in chaps. xl—lxvi.,
and arguing with great fulness of detail for the Isaianic author-
ship of the disputed prophecies. Neither Hengstenberg nor
Drechsler is strong on the linguistic side; and they have
another unfortunate resemblance in the vehemence with which

1 The Evangelische Kirchenzeitung, founded 1827.

2 History of Protestant Theology, vol. ii. pp. 436-7. ;

3 First edition, 2 vols., 1829-35 ; second, 4 vols., 1854-57 (recast). Translated in
Clark's Foreign Theological Library (for Isaiah, see vol. il.). a“

4 Vol. i., 1845; vol. ii., part 1, 1849, part 2, 1854 (posthumous) ; vol. iii, (con-
taining chaps. xl.-lxvi.), by Hahn and Delitzsch, 1857,

282 ESSAYS.

they impute motives to other critics. With Drechsler may be
coupled RUDOLF STIER,' better loved perhaps in England
than in his own country, who has left us an exposition of
chaps. xl.-Ixvi., of real value for its spiritual insight and con-
scientious endeavour to base the Christian or theological
upon the philological meaning. Much of what has been said
above of Hengstenberg is, however, applicable to Stier. He
is vehement and incisive in his language (but his vehemence
somehow hurts less than that of others), has no historical
sense, and is not a sound Hebrew scholar, being (unlike
Hengstenberg) afraid of deriving anything, even in scholar-
ship, from a rationalistic source.

We are in a very different atmosphere as we read the
commentary of KNOBEL ? (died 1863). A model of conden-
sation, it well deserves its name of ‘exegetical handbook.’
Great merit is due to it for its linguistic and archeological
dxpiBeva, but the author's view of prophecy is low (see his
Prophetismus, Breslau, 1837), and in the latter part of Isaiah
his excessive realism blinds him to the poetry of the form—
he seems to expect the prophet to write with the exactness
of a bulletin. One of the most useful parts of Knobel’s work
is the collection of stylistic peculiarities in II. Isaiah, which,
however, requires careful sifting.

But without depreciating his predecessors, apart from
whom his own achievement would have been impossible, it is
but fair to admit that far the most complete and equal
commentary is that of Dr. FRANZ DELITZSCH. He who
will patiently read and digest the new edition of this masterly
work will receive a training both for head and heart which
he will never regret. I think, indeed, that the learned author
is now and then over-subtle in his grammatical observations,
and too positive of the correctness of the received text ; and
also that, in spite of his intention to be strictly philological,
he has once or twice unconsciously wrested language in the
interests of theology ; and I know that in the judgment of
many his sentences are packed so full of meaning as to have
become obscure. But these are but spots upon the sun ; and
I heartily take for my own a sentence from a writer whom I
have had occasion to criticise severely—Dr. Klostermann :—
‘Delitzsch, from his full stores of knowledge, with his open
eye for all that is irregular and uncommon, his delicate ear
for all shades of expression, his reverent enthusiasm for the

1 Yesaias, nicht Pseudo-Fesaias (Barmen, 1850).

2 First ed., 1843 ; fourth (posthumous), edited by Diestel, 1872. (Diestel, whose
university lectures on Old Testament religion were of so high an order as to deserve
publication, has himself, too early for science, since passed away.)

3 First ed., 1866; third, 1879, (Clauk’s translation is from the first.)

ESSAYS. 283

word of the prophets, his unremitting toil, and conscientious
regard to minutia, has provided a commentary, with which
it will not be easy for another successfully to compete.’!
And yet, though it may be long before an equally finished
work is produced, there is still so much obscurity, so much
diversity of opinion, that we cannot regret the labour which
another scholar has bestowed from the same point of view.
NAEGELSBACH’S recent work (1878) is fresh and independent
even to a fault. Not many, I fear, of its new interpretations
are likely to stand ; but thoughtful criticism of the exegetical
tradition is always valuable, and the book has in some pas-
sages really advanced the interpretation of Isaiah. Perhaps
its special characteristic is this—that it regards the Bible as
one great organism, of which the Book of Isaiah is a part,
and that it carries out this principle with greater fulness
than previous writers. The abundance of well-chosen parallel
passages is a boon equally to the pure linguist and to the
exegete ; of the invaluable collection of deutero-Isaianic words
at the end of the book I have spoken already.

But to come nearer home. Is it not a strange phe-
nomenon that our English and American theologians should
be so little awake to the importance of a thorough study of
the prophets? General dissertations on prophecy are not,
indeed, entirely wanting, but calm and candid, self-denying
and theory-denying exposition of the sacred texts is still
sadly in arrears. Putting aside the modest, but very useful,
compilation of the American Albert Barnes (Glasgow, 1845),
I can call to mind but four professedly independent commen-
taries on the whole of Isaiah 2—those respectively of Drs.
HENDERSON, ALEXANDER, and Kay, and of Professor BIRKS.
The first of the four certainly supplied with more or less
ability a want painfully felt in our exegetical literature. It
is unambitious in its object, and confines itself mainly to the
letter of the sacred text. But though full of valuable in-
formation, it is an unsafe guide even in its chosen field of
scholarship. The colour of its exegesis is orthodox, but it
stands entirely apart from every form of scientific theology.
The second is by far the most complete, and does high
honour to the American theology of its date. It is at once
full (some perhaps will say, too full) and accurate ; but its
point of view is that of Hengstenberg, and it is no longer at
the centre of the exegetical movement. The third, from its
brevity, would seem to address itself to the class for whom

1 Zeitschrift fiir lutherische Theologie, 1876, p. 16. ?
* Sa AS ed. 1840; second, 1852. Alexander, edited by Eazdie, 2 vols.,
Edinburgh, 1865. Kay, 1875. Birks, first ed., 1871 ; second, 1878

284 ESSAYS.

the Speaker's Comimentary was originally intended—the inquisi-
tive but much-occupied laity, and the practical clergy. In spite
of its incompleteness, it is certainly one of the most original
contributions to Canon Cook’s series. Like Ewald, the author
puts aside mere historical and archzological investigations as
not touching the root of the matter: the text itself, both in its
primary grammatical sense and in its spiritual application,
absorbs the energies of the interpreter. But I shall best
consult the interests of the student by quoting the words of a
courteous and fair Continental critic, though of an opposite
school to the author. He writes thus, in reviewing, with that
discriminating tact which characterises him, the two exe-
getical works of Dr. Kay on the Psalms and on Isaiah :—
“Dr. Kay is one whom I would gladly see on our side. He
is not only a good Hebrew scholar; not only very well read
in the Old Testament ; but also, if Iam not altogether deceived,
a thoroughly earnest and above all an upright man.’! The
drawback which Dr. Kuenen finds is a ‘ self-confidence’ which
goes hand in hand with ‘very subjective and fantastic views,
in which he often stands entirely alone, or which, at least,
have hardly an adherent besides himself, but which not-
withstanding are propounded in so positive a tone that the
unsuspicious reader may well be taken by surprise.’? I have
myself been often struck by the ‘subjective’ character of Dr.
Kay’s Hebrew philology, though I gladly admit that one
may learn much from his rare command of the facts of
the language. His theological arguments would, I venture to
think, have gained considerably both in intrinsic value and in
effectiveness, if he had been able to recognise the elements of
good in those who are still struggling towards the light. In
one sense, no doubt, ‘the true light now shineth, and I at
least must agree with Dr. Kay, as against Dr. Kuenen in his
review, that ‘no one who is held in the chains of naturalistic
speculation is qualified to expound the writings of the
prophets’ (p. 3). But this general principle will not, I
submit, justify the learned author in throwing down the
gauntlet (as he has done) to all critical inquiry into the
historic and prophetic literature of the Old Testament. If
you wish to overcome heterodoxy, you must surely do so
from within, and not from without. Heterodoxy is a product
of mixed origin, and you must not violate charity and truth
by imputing it to a single cause. Are you sure that your
own form of ‘supernaturalism’ is adequate to all the facts
of the Scriptures (to say nothing of physical science)? Have

1 Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1871, Pp. 367.
2 [bid,, 1875, p. 569.

ESSAYS. 285

you, indeed, already discovered all those facts, so that you
have no further ‘light’ to wish for? Even if you reply in the
affirmative, charity and truth both forbid you to assume that
all who are not equally confident are either already ‘natu-
ralists,’ or drifting into ‘naturalism’ Surely it is as plain
as the day that there is a growing school of criticism and
exegesis, neither in any stiff sense orthodox, nor yet ratio-
nalistic, which welcomes and assimilates fragments of truth
from all quarters. Dr. Kay will, I trust, listen to this echo
of a younger and more hopeful generation.

Some of these remarks are equally applicable to Professor
Birks, who is, however, without the counterbalancing merit of
sound Hebrew scholarship. Of his painfully unphilological
treatment of the stylistic peculiarities ot II. Isaiah I have
spoken elsewhere ; his historical tact may be estimated by
his contemptuous attitude towards ‘the boastful bulletins of
idolatrous kings’ (p. 376)—z.e. the royal Assyrian inscrip-
tions. ‘Independence’ of this kind is not a merit but a
failing ; how different is the winning humility of the accom-
plished author of our best popular commentary on Isaiah,
Dean PLUMPTRE,' and the liberal spirit and historic insight
of Sir EDWARD STRACHEY in the work of which the title is
given below.? This too is emphatically a popular work; it
seeks primarily for the moral and political lessons of the great
prophet, and treats of the historic background in complete
subordination to these. There is much, therefore, which
strongly attracts the cultivated lay reader ; it is only critics of
the new historical school (of the existence of which the author
is evidently unaware) who will be unpleasantly impressed
by some features of the book. The objects, methods, and
results of the ‘higher criticism’ in its present stage are still
urealised by the author, who even fancies that he has dis-
covered a new historical argument for the unity of the book
by the aid of the Assyrian inscriptions. The argument
applies directly, indeed, only to chaps. xiii. xiv., xxi. I-10,
and xxxix. 6; but it has evidently a certain indirect bearing
on the authorship of chaps. xl.Ixvi. I am myself provisionally
at least satisfied with the theory which Sir Edward Strachey
has advocated with regard to chap. xxi. 1-10, but the problems
of chaps. xiii, xiv., xxxix. 6, and xl-Ixvi., are not so easily
solved (see vol. i. pp. 81, 239), and must still be left to what
is with no disparaging allusion called the ‘higher criticism.’
It is painful to have to utter the truism that, though common
sense has much to do with science, it is a trained and culti-

1 See vol. iv. of Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers, 1884.
2 Jewish History and Politics in the Times of Sargon and Sennacherib, 1874,

286 ESSAYS.

vated common sense which is required. Many as are the
faults of German writers on the Bible; a disregard of the
necessity of philological training is not one of them. But I
cannot allow myself to part from so sympathetic a work in
the tone of complaint. Let me rather quote a passage with
which I am in the heartiest agreement, and which well ex-
presses one of the primary requisites both of the commen-
tator upon Isaiah and of his reader. ‘If we will be rational,
no less than if we will be Christian, we must steadily re-
cognise the reality—the objective, independent reality—of
that communication which Isaiah was thus qualified to be-
come the recipient of. How this could be, how God reveals
His mind and will to men, how the poetic or other human
faculty gives form and expression to truths not imagined nor
discovered, but communicated from on high—this can never
be explained : an explanation is a contradiction in terms, an
assertion that the Infinite is definable, that the Superhuman
is subject to the laws, and expressible in terms, of the human’

(pp. 87, 88).

NOTE.

Among minor exegetical works on Isaiah, both Continental and Eng-
lish, the following seem to have a claim to be mentioned :—

E. F. K. Rosenmiiller: Jesat@ vaticinia annotatione perpetud illuse
travit E. F.C. R. 3 vols. Lips. 1811-20.

T. Roorda. Annotationes ad vaticinia Fes. i.-ix. 6, in Juynboll’s
Orientalia, i. 67-174. Amstel. 1840.

C. P. Caspari. Bettrdge zur Einleitung in das Buch Jesaja, Berlin,
1848. [Conservative : thorough to a fault.

Ueber den syrisch-ephraimitischen Krieg unter Jotham und
Ahaz (1849).

E. Meier. Der Prophet Jesaja. Erste Halfte [cc. i-xxiii.] Pforz-
heim, 1850. [School of Ewald.]

S. D. Luzzatto (died 1865). // Profeta Isaia volgarizzato e commentato
ad uso degli Israeliti?. Padova, 1855-67.

[An Italian translation with a Hebrew commentary. Acute and very
suggestive. ]

L. Reinke. Dée messianischen Weissagungen bet den grossen und
kleinen Propheten des Alten Testaments. Giessen, 1859-62. [Roman
Catholic ; learned and accurate. Vols. i. and ii. refer to Isaiah.]

V. F. Oehler. Der Knecht Jehova’s im Deuterojesaia, Stuttgart,
1865.
[Voz by the author of the well-known Old Testament Theology, but
from a kindred point of view. Contains a commentary on all the pas-
sages relative to the ‘Servant of Jehovah.’]

L. Seinecke. Der Evangelist des Alten Testaments. Leipzig, 1870.
[Accepts the unity of chaps. xl.-Ixvi., but dates the book at the close of the
Babylonian Exile ; the author, however, is placed in Padestine. A sug-

ESSAYS. 287

gestive commentary, though its fore is not in philology. Comp. Riehm’s
review in Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1872, pp. 553-578.]

B. Stade. De Isate Vaticiniis Athiopicis Diatribe. Leipzig, 1873.
[A learned philological and historical commentary on chaps. xvii. 12-14,
xviii., and xx.]

A. Hildebrandt. Juda’s Verhiliniss zu Assyrien in Jesaja’s Zeit
nach Keilinschriften und Jesatanischen Prophetieen. Marburg, 1874. [A
suggestive but premature illustration of Isaiah from the Assyrian in-
scriptions. ]

—— Art. ‘Jesaja Cap. xl.-Ixvi. Eine Bitte um Hiilfe in grosser
Noth’ Zedtschrift fiir lutherische Theologie, 1876, pp. 1-60.

Aug. Klostermann. Art.‘ Jesaja’ in Herzog’s Real-encyclopidte, vol. vi.
[Arbitrary, but suggestive. ]

H. Oort. ‘Jesaja xl’ Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1876, p. 528, &c.

A. Kohut. ‘Antiparsische Ausspriicheim Deuterojesaias. Zeztschr.
d. ad. m. Ges. 1876, pp. 709-722. [A wild attempt to show that II. Isaiah
is pervaded by an anti-Zoroastrian tendency. Answered by de Harlez in
the Revue des questions historigues, April 1877, and Matthes in the
Theologisch Tijdschrift, Nov. 1877.]

J. H. Scholten, ‘De lijdende knecht Gods, Jes. liii” Theologisch Tijd-
schrift, 1878, p. 117, &c.

Ed. Reuss. Les Prophétes, 2 vols., Paris, 1876. [Arranged chrono-
logically with introductions, and short, very clear footnotes. The pub-
lication was postponed by the Franco-Prussian war. From a ‘liberal’
point of view.]

Friedr. Koéstlin. Jesata und Jeremia. Ihr Leben und Wirken aus
ihren Schriften dargestelit. Berlin, 1879. [A _re-arrangement of the
‘genuine’ prophecies, with historical illustrations. ]

Lagarde’s Semztica and a few articles in journals by Kleinert and
others have been referred to already.

To the English works mentioned above, and in the course of the
commentary (for Perowne, see on chap. vill. 16; Taylor, on viii. 21 ;
Sayce, on x. 5, &c. ; Urwick, Neubauer and Driver, on lii. 13, &c.) add :—

G. Vance Smith. Zhe Prophecies relating to Nineveh and the Assy-
vians. Lond. 1857. [One of the first attempts to utilise the Assyrian
monuments. |

R. Payne Smith. Zhe Authenticity and Messianic Interpretation of
the Prophecies of Isaiah vindicated in a Course of Sermons preached before
the University of Oxford. Oxford and London, 1862. [A useful intro-
duction to the Messianic prophecies, from Hengstenberg’s point of view ;
the lines of Jewish interpretation are well sketched.]

J. M‘Gill. ‘Critical Remarks on Isa. xviii. 1, 2,’ in Journal of Sacred
Literature, 1862, pp. 310-324. [The work of an eminent Professor of
Oriental Languages at St. Andrews (see Dr. Pusey’s Dawie/) ; retrograde
exegesis.

ad Williams. Zhe Hebrew Prophets translated afresh from the
Original, 2 vols. {each containing a part of Isaiah]. Lond. 1866-71.
[Very complete in its plan, combining as it does the literary, historical,
philological, and theological points of view. Its chief merits are analo-
gous to those of Sir E. Strachey’s book noticed above ; the philology is
eccentric and unsound. The view of prophecy resembles in its vagueness

held by Ewald. ; : :
ee iee The Witness of the Old Testament to Christ ; being
the Boyle Lectures for 1868. Lond. 1868. [An appendix on the argu-
ment from style, which betrays a grave misconception of its nature—see
above, p. 232—is the reason for mentioning this pleasingly written popu-

lar work.]

288 ESSAYS.

T. K. Cheyne. Motes and Criticisms on the Hebrew Text of Isaiah.
Lond. 1868.

The Book of Isaiah Chronologically arranged. Lond. 1870.
C. Taylor. ‘An Interpretation of D9) mt,’ in Journal of of Philolo
1879, pp. 62-66. [Thinks that ‘the word required 1 is one aids poe
a passive condition of wonderment,’ on account of the following clause ;
and suggests ‘so shall he agas¢, or aghast, many nations, making
my=nImM; comp. on, vi. 10. But the meaning of ptm is doubtful,
if indeed the text is correct.]

H. Kriiger. Zssad sur la théologie d’Esaie, x\.-Ixvi. Par. 1881. [A
faithful and sympathetic study of the religious ideas of II. Isaiah, well
adapted for English students. ]

W. H. Cobb. ‘Two Isaiahs or One?’ in Bibliotheca Sacra, 1881,
p- 230, &c.; 1882, p. 104, &c. [See above, p. 253, moze. If the critical
value of the conclusions is but slight, the tables will still be useful com-
panions to the student or the text of ‘ Isaiah.’

— ‘The Integrity of the Book of Isaiah, in Bibliotheca Sacra,
1882, p. 519, &c. [On the traditional side.]

W. Robertson Smith. Zhe Prophets of Israel and their Place in
History to the Close of the Eighth Century B.C. Edinburgh, 1882. [Freshly
written, learned and suggestive, this work stands alone in our higher
theological literature. The author’s arrangement of the prophecies of
Isaiah differs considerably from my own, owing to his rejection of the
theory of an invasion of Judah by Sargon. See above, Essay I.]

S. M. Schiller-Szinessy. Am Exposition of [satah \ii. 13, 14, 15, and
liii. Cambridge, 1882. |The subject of the prophecy, Israel, as repre-
sented by the pious in his midst, culminating in the Messiah.]

E. H. Plumptre. ‘An Ideal Biography of Isaiah,’ in Exposztor, 1883.

To these must be added the primitive, unconscious commentators, to
whom the present work has been so largely indebted, and of whom we
have by no means heard the last. Three deserve to be mentioned with
special honour, though, inasmuch as (like most of the Hebrew chroniclers)
they wrote anonymously, they can only be entered under the names of
their translators.

George Smith. Zhe Assyrian Eponym Canon. Lond. 1875.
History of Sennacherib ; translated from the cuneiform inscrip-
tions. Edited by A. H. Sayce. Lond, 1878,

E. A. Budge. Aistory of Esar-Haddon ; from the cuneiform inscrip-
tions. Lond. 1880.

(For further references, see the present work passim. The time has
hardly come for a critical conspectus of Assyriological literature.)

XI. II, ISAIAH AND THE INSCRIPTIONS.

I.

WE have now traversed most of the subjects directly or
indirectly connected with the interpretation of Isaiah, and
with the foregoing rapid survey of the history of the exegesis
of the book it would seem as if we had reached our goal.
All: that remained would be in that case to resume the

ESSAYS. 280

‘gathering up’ of the ‘fragments’ which might have escaped
insertion in the commentary. But before taking this last
step, I must return to a ‘fragment’ of more than ordinary
significance, which has already found a place at the end of
the first volume. It relates to a discovery which not only
throws great light on some of those passages which ‘remain
vague and obscure till we know the circumstances under
which they were written ’ (p. 224), but also has a special bear-
ing on the great question (too great to be entered upon here)
of the limits or conditions of prophecy.

The remarkable favour shown to the Jewish exiles by Cyrus
has long attracted the attention of students. Was it dictated
by political motives? such is the first possibility which pre-
sents itself. In reply, it must be observed that if gratitude
had any influence on the action of Cyrus, it can only have
been as ‘a lively sense of favours to come.” The statement of
the prophet in xlv. 13 (‘He shall build my city, and mine
exiled ones shall he send home, not for price, and not for
reward’) precludes us from supposing that his countrymen
were conscious of having placed Cyrus under an obligation.
The accuracy of the prophet, however, is not in the least
disparaged by the hypothesis that one of the secondary
motives of the Persian was the belief that the restored Jews
would form a useful outpost in a distant part of his dominions,
This leaves us free to maintain, with the prophet, that the
determining motives of Cyrus were religious ones; and this
view of the case has appeared to be confirmed by the history
of Persian religion. The description of Ormazd in such an
early document as the inscription of Darius referred to in the
note on xlv. 7 might, from the purity of its monotheism, have
been penned by a Jewish prophet in honour of Jehovah. It
would have been quite in the spirit of the highest Old Testa-
ment revelations to regard such homage to Ormazd as un-
consciously offered to the true God Jehovah (vol. i., p. 261),
and a devout monotheist like Cyrus as only needing some
one to ‘teach him the way of God more perfectly.’ Such a
friendly guide it was natural to discover in the author of the
prophetic passages relative to Cyrus, which, as I have sug-
gested elsewhere, may be plausibly viewed as an apologia for
the Jews and their religion addressed to their conqueror.!
The prophet himself does not as yet look upon Cyrus as a
full adherent of the true religion, but he cherishes the firm
conviction that Cyrus will become such at no distant day.

But now comes Sir Henry Rawlinson’s discovery among

1 iew is equally admissible, whether the standing-point of the author of the
igfievote tes be cuually, or only idcally, at the close of the Exile.

VOL. Il. U

290 ESSAYS.

the latest treasures from Babylon, and throws the gravest
doubt not only on our, but on what we have supposed to
be the prophet’s, estimate of Cyrus. It represents him as a
complete religious indifferentist, willing to go through any
amount of ceremonies, to soothe the prejudices of a susceptible
population. Fresh from the pages of II. Isaiah, it is difficult
to realise that Cyrus was capable of this. He there appears
like an idealised David, a ‘man after God’s own heart’ in the
fullest sense of the English phrase. His conquest of Babylon
is the signal for an iconoclasm which marks the downfall of
the false religions. ‘ Bel boweth down, Nebo croucheth ; their
idols are given up to the beasts and to the cattle’ (xlvi. 1)—
such is the vision before the prophet’s inner eye. Not so,
says the ‘broad’ and politic Cyrus. ‘The gods dwelling
within them to their places I restored’ (2/2 asib dibtsunu ana
asrisunu utir); ‘daily I addressed Bel and Nebo that the
length of my days they should fulfil; that they should bless
the decree of my fate, and to Merodach my lord should say
that Cyrus the King thy worshipper and Cambyses his son
. 2. (yomi sam makhar Bel va Nabu sa araku yomiya hitami
hitibkaru anata dunkiya va ana Marduk bilya light sa Kuras
sarru palikhika va Kambusiya ablusu.... ).

The authenticity and accuracy of the newly discovered
inscription are self-evident. The concessions of Cyrus to
idolatrous polytheism are, indeed, just what might have been
expected, were it not for the strong language of the prophet.
They are but typical examples of the practice of the Persian
rulers. Cyrus in Babylonia is the pattern of his son Cambyses?
and even of the religious Darius in Egypt. But we cannot
admit the accuracy of the inscription without detracting
somewhat from the accuracy of the inspired prophet. This
is no doubt painful to a reverent mind, but here, as ever,
truth is the healer of its own wounds. Has not Wisdom
already been justified of her children? Throughout our study
of Isaiah have we not noticed ‘a gracious proportion between
the revelation vouchsafed and the mental state of the person
receiving it’? There is no defect implied in the revelation,
but only in the receptiveness of the human organ. The
admission of this relative defect involves no moral disparage-

1 These are the last connected words in the inscription. I here follow the word-
for-word translation of Sir H. Rawlinson; in vol. i., pp. 304-5, I gave his more
readable alternative version. The transliteration is also that of the Nestor of Assyrio-
logists ; it differs in many technical points from that with which we are familiar, See
Art. IL. in Yournal of Royal Asiatic Soc., Jan. 1880, pp. 70-97.

2 In this reference to the religious policy of Cambyses I follow the contemporary
hieroglyphic account, which differs considerably from that of Herodotus. See
Brugsch, History of Egypt, ii. 297, and comp. Dr. Birch, Rede Lecture (1879);

P. 40.

ESSAYS. 291

ment of the latter. In the case before us, for instance, the
prophet overrates Cyrus just because he is so completely a
prophet. His character is too simple, too religious, for him
to realise a mental state so mixed, a policy so complicated
with non-religious considerations. He cannot distinguish
between the king and the man, between a public and private
character. He cannot form a conception of a religious indif-
ferentist, He will have ‘no bowing in the house of Rim-
mon.

It is unfortunate that the cylinder-inscription is too im-
perfect to clear up the history of the fall of Babylon; but
the deficiency is supplied by another cuneiform text, for the
decipherment of which we are indebted to Mr. T. G. Pinches.?
The text is arranged in the form of annals, and covers, includ-
ing the fragmentary portions, the whole of the reign of Nabu-
nahid or Nabonidus, the last of the Kings of Babylon? The
chief point of interest in it is that it shows how it was that
Cyrus found Babylon so easy to conquer. Nabonidus, in
fact, spent the last years of his reign idling in his palace
near Babylon, while his son was with the army in Accad (the
northern part of Babylonia). He even neglected the due
worship of the gods, thereby giving great dissatisfaction to
the priests. Not until his seventeenth year did he rouse
himself from his inaction. It was under the pressure of fear.
There had been a revolt among the people of ‘the lower sea’
(ze. the Mediterranean), Then he began to think of his
neglected gods, for the text records that ‘the god of Bel came
forth’—z.e. probably the image of Merodach was carried
round in procession (see on xlvi. 1). The images of the temples
of other cities were also brought, especially those of Accad,
and this explains a statement of Cyrus in the former in-
scription that he had restored the gods of Sumir and Accad
to their places. Another revolt, which occurred in the last
year of Nabonidus, was still more favourable to Cyrus ; it was
among the people of Accad. Four months after this, Cyrus
descended to Babylon, and took it, without, as it would seem,
even a street-battle He then began that policy of religious
conciliation which is to readers fresh from Isaiah so unavoid-
able a surprise,

1 T have already remarked that the slight inaccuracy/in x. 10 (see my note) is a
parallel to the case before us. See = on xXxxvi, Io.

2 7. S. B.A,, vol. vii. pp. 139-176. : : F

3 So Mr. Pinches, in opposition, however, to Sir H. Rawlinson, who thinks that
the years bel to the reign of Cyrus. :

Pd It ae na the x6th of the Babylonian month Dumuzi (Tammuz). On the sth,
corresponding to Midsummer Day, there was a religious festival, of the nature of a
marriage-feast, and probably of an orgiastic character (comp. Dan. v.). See Mr, Bos-
cawen’s letter in Azheneum, July 9, 1881. ms

292 ESSAYS.

A minor point which is finally scttled by the cylinder-
inscription is the genealogy of Cyrus.

The line of descent from Achamenes to Cyrus is, 1.
Achzmenes, 2. Teispes, 3. Cyrus, 4. Cambyses, and 5. Cyrus.
Teispes, it will be remembered, is also mentioned both in
Herodotus (vii. 11) and in the Behistun inscription of Darius!
among the ancestors of the latter king.

September 1880.
2.

The above results would be sufficiently important, were it
certain (as I have hitherto assumed it to be) that Cyrus was
a Zoroastrian believer ; and as soon as we have put aside our
preconceived opinion respecting Cyrus, we can see that they
are in themselves plausible. Prof. Sayce, indeed, appears to
think that the theory of Cyrus’s indifferentism is excluded
by the religious veneration with which he speaks of the
Babylonian deities. But is it not a characteristic of primitive
paganism, as opposed to the full Biblical religion, that it
permits the most various forms of belief to exist peaceably
side by side? I for my part can see nothing more wonderful
in the religious tolerance of Cyrus than in that of any other
primitive pagan monarch. The really surprising fact, which I
have not here to consider, is, that this primitive tolerance
does now and then give way to a violent spirit of religious
centralisation ; e.g. in the noted case of Antiochus Epiphanes.
But such instances belong to the decline ofa civilisation. And
certainly if Darius, who makes such a parade of his Zoroas-
trian faith, adopted the policy of religious indifferentism in
Egypt, it is difficult to see why Cyrus (even though a less
fervent Zoroastrian) should not have done so in Babylonia
and Palestine. But the main result of Prof. Sayce’s recently
published study on the inscription? is independent of this
incidental expression of opinion ; and, startling as it is, it
must, I am sure, meet with general acceptance. I ought
to add that M. Halévy (so well known in connection with
Semitic inscriptions) has simultaneously come to virtually the
same conclusion. The point is this, that Cyrus, though of
Aryan origin,‘ was in all probability not a Zoroastrian at all.
Before, by his victory over Astyages, he became king of the
Medes and Persians, he was, in right of his birth, king of

‘Anzan’ (the native name for Elam,=Susiana). ‘J am
Kuras, he says, ‘son of Cambuziya, great king, king of
1 R. P., vii. 87.

2 Letter in the Academy, Octobcr 16, 1880, pp. 276-7.
5 ‘Cyrus ct le retour de l'exil,’ in Revue des dudes juives, No. 1, pp. 41-63.
4 His name, however, is probably non-Aryan; see below, on sliv. 28,

ESSAYS. 293

Susiana, grandson of Kuras, great king, king of Susiana,
great-grandson of Teispes, great king, king of Susiana.’ Now,
Susiana or (speaking loosely) Elam, as the merest tyro in
Assyriology knows (witness the names Kudur-mabug, Kudur-
nankhundi, and the annals of Assurbanipal), was peopled by
a non-Aryan and idolatrous race! Teispes, the Acheamenian
(see above), was no doubt a Persian, and therefore an Aryan,
but he and his band of fellow-Aryans found for themselves a
new home among a non-Aryan people. ‘The main bulk of
their relatives,’ as Prof. Sayce remarks, ‘seem to have been
left behind in Persis, and we cannot wonder, therefore, that
the invaders of “ Anzan” [Elam] should have intermarried
with the old inhabitants of their new home, and adopted their
religious ideas and art.’ This is not a mere hypothesis. It
is expressly stated by Darius in the famous Behistun inscrip-
tion that Gomates, the first pseudo-Smerdis, had destroyed
the Zoroastrian temples (2. P., vii. g1). This, as Prof.
Sayce has well pointed out, would have been an absurd act
in the pretender, if Cyrus and his sons had been pure-blooded
Zoroastrians. Darius, on the other hand, was (to use his own
words) ‘a Persian, son of a Persian,’ and naturally enough
a strong Zoroastrian both in belief and in policy. He ‘be-
longed to the elder branch of the family which had remained
behind in Persis, while the younger branch had sought a
new kingdom among the non-Aryan population of Elam.
Another documentary evidence pointed out by Prof. Sayce,
is the peculiar expression used by Darius in speaking of
Veisdates, the second pseudo-Smerdis. He does not say that
Veisdates was a Persian, but that he was ‘a man who dwelt
(in a certain town) in Persia.” His followers, too, are stated
in the proto-Medic text to have been not Persians, but the
old ‘ families of “ Anzan” [Elam].

We can now appreciate the force of the strange silence of
Cyrus in the cylinder-inscription with regard to Ormazd, the
supreme God of Zoroastrianism, to whom Darius so constantly
and devoutly refers. The cause is one which it is a little
painful to admit. Cyrus, on whom the prophet of Jehovah
lavishes such honourable titles ; Cyrus, who, the prophet even
appears to hope, may be won over to the true faith, and
become a conscious fellow-worker with God ; is a polytheist
and an idolater. Still the inscription, when rightly under-
stood, is not in conflict with the prophecy, but only with a
gloss upon the prophecy. Nebuchadnezzar, though an
idolater, is called in Jeremiah (xxv. 9, xxvil. 6, xliii. 10) ‘My
eee Leseeek sald eds a Prior tan "eg Cuneiform Inscriptions of

204 ESSAYS.

Servant ;’ and the conversion of idolaters to the true faith is
the standing hope of the prophets. The peculiarity of II.
Isaiah is that in it the conversion of an individual king is
hoped for, whereas elsewhere the prophecy of conversion is
vague and general. Yet it should be remembered that the
conversion of Cyrus is only a hope, not an assured certainty,
and that all prophecy relative to events in the spiritual sphere
is limited by the possibility of the moral resistance of the
persons prophesied of.

The shock may be painful; but, as I have said before,
truth heals its own wounds. Our loss, if loss it be, is com-
pensated by a greater gain. It has often been said that
the Old Testament religion has been deeply influenced by
Zoroastrianism ; and though I have repeatedly had occasion
to combat this view (see notcs above on xxvi. 19, xlv. 7; also
I.C.A., p. 130), I could not anticipate such a complete docu-
mentary refutation of it. We now know that the Aryan and
Zoroastrian element did not obtain supremacy in the Ache-
menian empire till the accession of Darius, too late to exert
any marked influence on Jewish modes of thought. M.
Halévy remarks that the case of the Persian religion is ana-
logous to that of the Persian language, which had no political
importance in the empire of the ‘great king ;’! and further that,
‘in spite of the long residence of a Persian dynasty at Susa,
the name of Ahuramazda was so repugnant to the Susians
that the Susian redactor of the Behistun Inscription adds the
descriptive term “God of the Aryans.”’

Of direct, circumstantial illustrations of II. Isaiah from the
newly-found inscriptions I am not able to indicate many (see
notes on xiii. 17, xlv. 2). Knobel, no doubt, would have
found more; and M. Halévy’s microscopic eye has discovered
points of contact in chaps. xiii—xiv. 23, xlv. 1-7, xlvi., from
which he thinks he can determine the date of those prophetic
passages. I venture to think that this part of his able and
stimulative paper does not show much evidence of sound
judgment. Why not be content with the one great result
relative to the religious position of Cyrus ??

October 1880,

1 Aramaic was the official, as well as the commercial language.

2 Dr. Kuenen (//ibdert Lectures, 1882, pp. 135-6, 321-2) disputes the soundness of
the historical results assumed above, partly on @ #riort grounds, and partly on the
authority of M. Oppert, who, however, is too fond of isolation to be a safe guide.
The gloss in the British Museum Corpus of Assyrian Inscriptions (ii. 47, 18), peremp-
torily declares that Anduan (pronounced, as it states, Anzan) signifies Elamtuv, 7é
Elam (Sayce, Trans. Soc, Bibl, Arch., 1874, Pp. 475)»

295

LAST WORDS ON ISAIAH.

Suvaydyere Ta meptaoevoavra kAdopara, iva py Te dmoAyTat.
(Evang. D. Joann. vi. 12.)

On ii. 6 (vol. i p. 17). The suggestion that ‘the law of’ (m71n)
may have fallen out before ‘thy people’ (q»y) is worth considering
(Gratz, Die Psalmen, i. 138). Hitzig’s argument for taking the first
clause as a continuation of the address in v. 5, is not without force,
only (OY) cannot mean ‘ nationality.’

On iii. 3 (vol. i. p. 22). ‘Expert enchanters’ continued to be in
request down to the Talmudic period, if not later. Diseases were
cured partly by simple remedies, but partly also, as was thought, by
the use of magical formule of amulets (comp. v. 20. Comp. Eders-
heim, Life of Jesus the Messiah (ed. 1), ii. 769-773.

On iv. 2 (vol. i, p. 28). Prof. de Lagarde’s note on this passage
in his Semz¢ica is not remarkably lucid. How myn) nyoy and yusa sp
can be antithetical, consistently with the synonymous predicates, is
more than I can understand. Nor does the learned professor attempt
to explain the mpm ny of Gen. xix. 25, which must of course have
included the fruits of cultivated soil; and, as I have remarked in the
commentary, the opposite of the Talmudic phrase ‘field of Baal’ (see
below) is—not ‘fruit of the land’—but ‘field of fountains.’ Still,
as one reviewer of the Semitica! has been attracted by Prof. de
Lagarde’s explanation, I will quote a few more sentences. ‘mn moy
and pyisn yp are. evidently opposed . . . . ny is that which grows
without cultivation ; it is said of hair, of wood, of the ay of the field,
Ley. xiii. 37, Eccl. ii. 6, Gen. ii. 5. If we were not in the region of
the religion of Jahwé, a formula would be used which is still current
among Semitic people, in order to define the word nny still more
distinctly as 75 avropdrws pve. yan n’a of the Gemoro is the
antithesis to poowin nva of the Mishno (Aled katon, ii. 11, 1 ; comp.
Buxtorf, 2412.) “Baal’s land,” according to Wetzstein (Z. D.ALG. xi.
489), means in Arabic land which is nourished, not by springs, but
the rain of heaven; “ Baal’s fruit,” that which grows on such land’
[comp. Lane, Arabic Lexicon, s.v. balun].

Qn chap. vi. (vol. i. p. 39). A parallel to ‘Holy, holy; holy,’ is
suggested by Friedrich Delitzsch in the thrice-repeated ‘gracious,’

1 Dr. Eberhard Nestle, in Schiirer's Literaturzettung.

296 LAST WORDS ON ISATIATI.

and ‘may they be at hand’ (asst, igrubu) uttered, the one at the
beginning, and the other at the end, of Assyrian intercessory chants,
(Wo lag das Paradies? p. 253.)

On vi. 2 (vol. i. p. 37). ‘Seraphim were standing above him.’
This suggests, as my friend Mr. Tomkins remarks, the symbolic
urzei or royal serpents above the enthroned god, and the figure of the
heaven over all in Egyptian scenes of worship. But it only suggests
a distant analogy, for the winged seraphim had no fixed position like
the urei, but hoyered rather than stood. A more interesting parallel
is that of the Egyptian sevef (see Mr. Tomkins in my Jsazah, ed. 2,
p. 284)—interesting, however, not so much for the light which it throws
upon Isaiah as for its bearing on the general question of the affinities
of the seraph-myth. That the seraphim and the cherubim were
of kindred origin may be surmised from the Bible itself. Ezekiel
transfers an important detail from Isaiah’s picture of the seraphim to
his own description of the cherubim (comp. Isa. vi. 2, Ezek. i. 11),
and the two figures are found in Rev. iv. 8. So, in Egypt, the sevef
represented at Beni Hassan with other marvellous composite creatures
of the time of the r2th dynasty (Rosellini, i. pl. xxiii.) evidently
corresponds quite as much to the cherub as to the seraph : it is, in
fact, a winged hawk-headed lion. We find the servef again in a
demotic papyrus of the age of Augustus, where he is described as
having ‘a beak as of an eagle, an eye as of a man, strong sides as of
a lion, scales as of a fish (or turtle ?), venom as of a serpent,’ and as
‘seizing [his prey] in his claws in an instant, and taking them above
the top of the clouds of heaven.’! A description which resembles
that of the divine bird Zu in the primitive Babylonian mythology—
‘the cloud or storm-bird, the lion or giant bird, the bird of prey, the
bird with sharp beak.’ Thus the myth-making imagination in Egypt
flits from bird to quadruped precisely as it does in Mesopotamia and
Palestine. Mr. Tomkins well reminds us that the 47wbu (cherub)
of the portal of the Babylonian Hades is addressed as ‘the bull
begotten by the god Zu’ (the storm-bird).?

‘he explanation of the vague distinction between seraphim and
cherubim is a simple one. As we have seen already, they were at
their origin the mythic expressions of kindred physical phenomena.
Prof. Friedrich Delitzsch, a gifted son of the great commentator on
Isaiah has lately pronounced a decisive opinion in favour of this
thesis from an Assyriological point of view. His words are, ‘That
the cherubim were originally a personification of the clouds, and the
seraphim of the serpent-like flashes of lightning, the mythological
texts published in vol. iv. [of the British Museum Collection of

1 Revillout, Revee égrptienne, 1880, p. 58; 1881, p. 86,
2 Lenormant, Les origines de Uhistoire, vol. i. p. 116.

LAST WORDS ON ISAIAH. 297

Cuneiform Inscriptions] hardly permit a doubt.’! As the article in
which I have given the grounds for my own similar view as regards
the cherubim is buried in an encyclopedia, and even escaped the
notice of Lenormant,? I will quote the substance of it here, with an
occasional glance at Prof. Delitzsch’s more recent investigation. The
interest of any illustration of the popular beliefs of the Israelites (so
closely akin to those of their neighbours, and by this kinship almost
compelling us to a ‘supernaturalistic’ conception of Old Testament
prophecy) may serve for an additional excuse, if excuse be needed.
The late M. de Saulcy was of opinion that ‘ the vast field of hypo-
theses will always remain open’? with regard to the cherubim. Thanks
to the students of cuneiform, we are no longer shut up to this melan-
choly admission ; something, at least, can be affirmed as positively
certain, The only difficulty arises from the fact that the statements
of the Old Testament are not perfectly uniform. Let us turn in the
first instance to its poetry, which is often (like its prophecy) the reposi-
tory of popular mythicexpressions. In Ps. xviii. 10 (2 Sam. xxii. 11)
Jehovah is described as ‘riding upon a cherub,’ but in the parallel
line as ‘swooping ’—an expression which suggests the idea of the
flight of an eagle (comp. Deut. xxviii. 49, Jer. xlviii. 40, xlix. 22).
Putting the two phrases together, we may conclude that, according to
one side of the myth (retained by inspired writers as a part of their
imaginative apparatus) the cherub was the eagle-winged bearer of
the deity. This result would seem to justify connecting the word with
the Assyrian kuribu, a synonym of kurukku or karakku, the ‘ circling’
bird—i.e., according to Friedrich Delitzsch,4 the vulture. On the
other hand, Ezekiel gives the myth a somewhat different turn. In a
passage evidently full of popular phraseology (xxvili. 13-16), though
agreeing with the psalmist in mentioning dat one cherub, the prophet
describes him as ‘ walking in the midst of stones of fire’ (thunder-
bolts ?), and as extending his wings over ‘the holy mountain of
Elohim’ ; in other words, as a land-animal, the attendant and guard,
rather than the bearer, of the deity. And in the fuller account of
Paradise in Genesis, ‘the cherubim’ (implying a dazd of cherubs) are
stationed ‘ with (or near) the blade of the turning sword’ (ze. the

1 Wo lag das Paradies? (1881), p. 155.

2 Encyclop. Brit. vol. v. (1876), art. ‘Cherubim’'; comp. Lenormant, Les origines
(1880), chap. iii. (Prof. Friedr. Delitzsch dissents from this view, which is of course
no more than a plausible hypothesis. He does not distinctly recognise the two sides
of the myth found in the Old Testament writings, which M. Lenormant and myself
haye independently sought to explain. He says, ‘All that we know [from the Old
Testament] is that the cherubim were winged; but whether they were like birds, or
four-footed, or like men, remains obscure’ (Wo lag das Paradies? p. 150). But Ps.
xviii. and Ezek. xxviii. seem to authorise a more definite statement ; and at any rate,
Del. has himself pointed out that the Hebrew conception of the cherub as the bearer
of the deity may have its parallel in the notion of the ‘throne-bearers’ in Babylonio-
Assyrian mythology (see e.g. the Deluge-story, col. ii., 1. 44).

3 Histoire de lart judaigue, p. 24.

4 Assyrische Studien, Heft i. (1874), pp. 107-8.

BS):
298 LAST WORDS ON ISAIAH.

lightning—the Babylonian analogue has been long ago pointed out by
M. Lenormant) ‘to guard the way to the tree of life’ (Gen. iii. 24).
Now, according to a talismanic inscription copied by M. Lenormant,
kiritbu is a synonym for the steer god, whose winged image filled the
place of guardian at the entrance of the Assyrian palaces ; and in the
imaginative description penned by Ezekiel in Mesopotamia, one of
the four faces of a cherub (only two are spoken of in Ezek. xli. 18)
is that of an ox (Ezek. i. 10).!. We should, therefore, I venture to
think, connect the word ‘cherub’ (2’7ih) primarily with the Assyrian
hirithu, but also, as proposed above, with kuriibu. The two forms
are admitted to be connected,? and are obviously expressive of some
quality common to the king of birds and the colossal steer. What
that quality is, has at length been determined. An Assyrian list of
synonyms contains the equation (immediately after the words for
king and queen, lord and lady) ka-ru-bu=ru-bu-u: kariibu is there-
fore a synonym for vudi ‘great, exalted, majestic,’ and the root-
meaning is ‘to be great, powerful.’

But we have not exhausted the mythic parallels of the cherubim.
The winged genii found in the Egyptian temples have often been
adduced. ‘Like the cherubim,’ remarks Lieblein, ‘they are always
in couples.’ Their name in Egyptian is not known ; but Mr. le Page
Renouf has found‘ ina very old portion of chap. 136 of the ‘Book
of the Dead’ the word yevefz, which means the lion forms, symbolic
of the cosmic forces, which the Osiris sees in his celestial journey.
This is at any rate an interesting approximation to the Hebrew word ;
but the Assyrian evidence destroys its claim to be regarded as the
etymology. The winged ypizes, too, inevitably suggest a compari-
son with the cherubim both as to their name and as to their twofold
function of guardians and bearers of the deity (Herod. iv. 13, ili. 106,
Asch. Prom. 395). Still closer, at any rate to one form of the cherub
myth, is the parallel offered by the (non-Semitic) Elamites, who placed
images of a steer-god at the entrances of their palaces and temples.
Assurbanipal boasts that he ‘broke the winged lions and bulls watch-
ing over the temples and removed the winged bulls’ (2.P., i. 86).

The origin of the word cherub has now been made clear, and the
place of the conception in the great family of myths. The meaning
is not more difficult to discover than that of the seraphim. The
cherubim are either the storm-clouds, or (as Prof. Tiele suggests) the
cloud masses which seem to guard the portals of the sky, and on
which the sun-god appears to issue forth at break of day. This will
account for the expressions used of the cherubim both of the heavenly

1 Ezek. x. 14 scems to be corrupt ; the correction is suggested by i. ro.

2 So Delitzsch (of. céé.) : ‘ Aurudu ist gowiss wurzelverwandt mit assyr. £é-ru-bu."
3 Recherches sur la chronologie égyptienne (Christiania, 1873), Pp. 131.

4 Proceedings of Soc. of Bill, Arch, May 6, 1884.

LAST WORDS ON ISATAII. 299

and of the earthly ‘habitation’ of Jehovah—expressions taken up, as
it would seem, by the inspired writers from the folklore of their times.
The symbolic value of these striking creations of the fancy was too
great to be lost. As a kindred poet says :—
Per questo la Scrittura condiscende
A vostra facultate, e piedi e mano
Attribuisce a Dio, ed altro intende;
E santa Chiesa con aspetto umano
Gabriel e Michel vi rappresenta,
E l'altro che Tobia rifece sano,!

The reader will observe two striking omissions in the above ; the
cherubim of the ark are not adduced as authorities, nor is any special
weight attached to Ezekiel’s description in the so-called Aferkabah.
My object was to ascertain the popular mythic conception, as it is inci-
dentally expressed in the Old Testament. In the description of the ark
(to which Lenormant refers for his view of the cherubim as bird-like),
and in Ezekiel’s vision the shaping power of a wisely directed ima-
gination has modified the original mythic date. In a later passage of
Ezekiel (see above), the prophet evidently speaks as the mouthpiece
of his people, but in chap. i, he starts from a foreign version of the
cherub, and developes it in his own way. He might, indeed, as well
have called these creatures of wonder-land ‘ nirgalli’ as ‘ cherubim,.’
for by their outward form they equally suggest the winged lion and
the winged bull.? ‘It seems as if Ezekiel sought to outdo the
Assyrian and Babylonian artists ; as if the true religion were to outdo
its rivals even in its symbolism.’?

On chap. vi. (Isaiah’s humanised seraphim). The winged lions
(nirgaliz) of the Assyrian portals sometimes have human figures as far
as the waist (see Vigouroux, Za Bible, &c., iv. 348, pl. Ixxii).

On chap. vii. (vol. i. p. 42). Prof. de Lagarde expresses with
great cogency the view that this chapter is the work of a later editor.
He calls it ‘ein cento aus echten, aber musterhaft ungeschickt
zusammengeflickten, ausspriichen des Isaias’ (Semtica, i. 9-13).

On vii. 13 (vol. i. p. 46). My theory is that the royal princes
(not the ‘ princes’ of the Auth. Vers. of Jeremiah) formed a kind of
order, distinct, nominally at any rate, from the pm, that they held
high positions in the State, and in Jeremiah’s time exercised the royal
function of judgment (Jer. xxi. 11, 12 ; comp. on Isa.i. 10). Further,
that during the reign of Josiah, the py (a term which probably in-
cludes representatives of the people), and the royal princes, were
both equally chargeable with grave offences (Zeph. i. 8). Here was no
doubt the germ of a possible oligarchy. It appears from Brugsch’s
History that the same germ existed in Egypt. Normally, this royal

1 Dante, Paradiso, iv. 43--48.
2 Vigouroux, La Bible et les découvertes nodernes, i iv. 338
3 Cheyne, ‘The Prophecies of Ezekiel,’ in The Clerical World, No. x, p. 8

3Cc0 LAST WORDS ON ISATAII.

order would supply the counsellors and officials of the king ; abnor-
mally, they would (allying themselves perhaps with the pw’ of
non-royal origin) convert the king into a kind of maitre du palais.
It has been objected by Mr. Simcox (Church Quarterly Review, July
1880) that the massacres of Jehoram, Athaliah, and Jehu would have
left but few royal princes remaining. But is this so certain? ‘ David,
according to 2 Sam. v. 14-16, had no less than eleven sons born in
Jerusalem ; and in Zech. xii. 12 a sort of secondary royal family is
mentioned, co-ordinately with the house of David,” viz., “ the house
of Nathan”? (I.C.A. p. 88). It seems to me that if all the legitimate
descendants of all the kings and kings’ sons be included, the ‘ house
of David’ (which ought strictly to include the ‘house of Nathan,’
comp. Luke iii. 31) would be too numerous and widely spread to be
destroyed. Besides, the descendants of the long-lived Uzziah would
have grown up by the time of the Syrian war.

On vil. 14 (vol.i. p. 48). The ‘sign’ of Immanuel. Prof. Robert-
son Smith adopts the explanation of Roorda and Kuenen, ‘that a
young mother who shall become a mother within a year may name
her child “God with us;”’ and he remarks elsewhere that viii. 3, 4
is a parallel prophecy, with ‘a similar and quite unambiguous sign’
(The Prophets of Israel, pp. 272, 425). There is, of course, no doubt
that, in some sense, the birth of Maher-shalal-hash-baz may be called
a ‘sign’ (see commentary, ad loc.) ; the only difference between my-
self and Prof. Smith is as to whether ‘sign’ in vii. 14 is to be used in
a different sense from that in which it is used in vii. 11 ; whether it
is probable that Isaiah offered Ahaz a wonderful ‘sign’ in vii. 11, and
finally gave him one of a lower and quite ordinary kind. I cannot
see that this is probable. Prof. Smith does not offer an explana-
tion of ‘thy land, O Immanuel,’ in viii. 8,

On ix. 6 (vol. i p. 61). Such an elaborate sentence-name as
Luzzatto supposes would not be natural in Isaiah’s time, though it might
be in that of the writer of Chronicles, who distributes the sentence—
‘Ihave given great and high help ; I have spoken visions in abun-
dance’ among ‘the imaginary sons of Heman,’ giving a fragment of it
to each (1 Chron. xxvi. 4). Del. remarks (Academy, April 10, 1880)
that the oldest Assyrian sentence-name which he has met with is
Abu-ina-ckallt-lilbur, ‘ May the father become old in the palace.’

On x. 4. For the pointing Osir in Ex. vi. 24 comp. the undoubted
Osir in Pheenician proper names, e.g., Abdosir, Osirsamar ; and for
Khur in Ex. xvii. ro comp. the Phoen. Khur or Khor.

On x. 9 (vol. i. p. 70). Kadesh, on the Orontes, the southern
capital of the Hittites, had a Semitic name ; hence a slight presump-
tion that the northern capital had one too. Friedrich Delitzsch
(Paradies, p. 268) thinks that Carchemish is of Aramaic origin ; he

LAST WORDS ON ISATAII. 301

analyses it, after G. Hoffmann, into wv 939 ‘fortress of Mish,’
on the ground that the earlier name of Oropos (¢.e. Carchemish ?)
was Telmessus (or Telmissus), Ze. wy $n, ‘heap of Mish’ (the
‘fortress ’ having at last become a ‘ruinous heap’).

On xiii. 10 (vol. i., p. 84). One may ask Lenormant, Why should
not more than one brilliant constellation have been called #’st/? We
can thus give a natural explanation of the plural.

On xiv. 4-21 (vol. i. pp. 88-93). On the elegiac form, see Dr.
Budde, in Stade’s Zestschrift, 1882, pp. 12-14, who has proposed
various emendations to restore symmetry to the song. Comp. Bickell,
Carmina vet. Test. metric, p. 202.

On xiv. 8 (vol. i. p. 88). M.Pognon, Assistant Consul of France
at Beirut, thinks he has found the site of a timber-yard where Nebu-
chadnezzar had trees cut down to be sent to Babylon. At any rate,
the two inscriptions he has found on the rocks of a valley (Wady
Brissa) on the E. slope of Lebanon are chiefly concerned with
building operations in Babylon. (Zhe Times, Jan. 1884).

On xiv. 13, 14 (vol. i. pp 90, 91). The similarity and the con-
trast of the general Oriental and the Israelitish view of royalty will
be manifest. Some Israelitish kings had not even a shadow of divinity
(Hos. viii. 4). The Davidic king, no doubt, approaches the honour
accorded to the Babylonian and Assyrian kings ; he is called Jehovah’s
son (2 Sam. vii. 14, Ps. Ixxxix. 27), but so too is the people of Israel
(Ex. iv. 22, Jer. xxxi. 9, Hos. xi. 1). It is only the Messiah who is
described somewhat as the neighbouring peoples would describe their
kings—not only as ‘my companion and the man who is my neighbour’
(Zech. xiii. 7, pronouncing 7é%), but even ’é/ gibbor (ix. 7, Hebr. 6).
The proto-Babylonians, however, sometimes went so far as to prefix
the determinative of divinity to the names of their kings. Two
examples of this are given by Prof. Sayce, Z.S.B.A. v. 442 ; comp.
Lenormant, Zrude sur quelques parties des syllabaires cuntiformes, p. 14.

On chaps. xv. xvi. (vol. i. p. 97). I have endeavoured to do
justice to the various textual phenomena, and I do not see how the
conclusion can be resisted. Wellhausen with much probability assigns
the original prophecy to the period of Jeroboam II. and Uzziah, since
it presupposes that Judah is a rather powerful kingdom (Zcyel. Brit.,
art. ‘Moab’). But to give the reader the opportunity of hearing the
other side, I quote here Dr. Weir’s view as to the authorship of the
prophecy, from the manuscript notes lent to me. On xvi. 1-5, he
confirms the opinion I have myself expressed ; his suggestion in the
words italicised would, I think, carry more weight were it accom-
panied by a literary analysis. But from this, Dr. Weir prudently

abstained.
‘Assuming, therefore, that the two concluding verses of this

302 LAST WORDS ON ISATATL.

prophecy are from Isaiah, is the rest of it also originally his, or is it
to be assigned to another and an older author? The majority of
modern expositors are disposed to adopt the latter alternative ; and
Hitzig, followed by Maurer, had made an elaborate attempt to prove
that the real author of the prophecy is Jonah, and that we have a
Scriptural reference to it in 2 Kings xiv. 25. The style, it is said,
differs considerably from that of Isaiah ; the frequent repetition of
‘Dd and j3 by has been specially noted ; also the accumulation of
geographical names. No trace here, it has been said, of Isaiah’s
light and rapid march—of his bold transitions and combinations ;
the stream of thought flows tediously and heavily along, and cause
and consequence are marked with cumbrous accuracy. It must be
allowed that these remarks are not altogether groundless. The style
of the prophecy certainly differs in some parts from the usual style
of Isaiah’s compositions ; though none but an impatient and fastidious
critic would pronounce it heavy and tedious. To account for this
difference, it is to be observed that there is in this prophecy a more
copious outflow of sympathetic emotion than we usually find in the
earlier prophecies of Isaiah, arising probably in part from the historical
relationship which subsisted between Israel and Moab; and such
emotion is quite inconsistent with the light and rapid march which
some critics desiderate here. And if this is not thought to furnish
an adequate explanation of all the alleged peculiarities, ‘here zs no
reason why we should refuse to avatl ourselves of the hypothesis that
some of the verses, especially in the fifteenth chapter, may have been
quoted from an earlier prophecy.’

‘Granting this, it appears to me very certain that the prophecy is
substantially from the pen of Isaiah. The middle stanza (xvi. 1-5)
is, I should say, unquestionably Isaiah’s. In the last stanza the de-
scription of the vine of Sibrnah may be brought into comparison
with v. 1-6, and the prominence given to the ‘ pride’ of Moab as the
cause of Moab’s fall is just what we should expect from the author
of chap. ii. In the first stanza (chap. xv.) also there are indications
not obscure, of the hand of Isaiah, as in the latter part of z. 6, and
in the closing words of the stanza (novos in the construct state
being found only in Isaiah—comp. iv. 2, x. 20, xxxvii. 3).’

On xv. 6 (vol. i. p. 99). ‘The waters of Nimrim.’ Scetzen had
already identified Nimrim with the lower part (still called Nahr
Nimrin) of the W4dy pointed out (see note in vol. i.) by Consul
Wetzstein, the luxuriant meadows of which form a strong contrast
with the gloomy scenery of the Wady en-Numeira. As to the mean-
ing of the name Nimrim, it is rather tempting to connect it with

1 The italics are the editor's,

LAST WORDS ON ISAIAH. 303

Arab. xamir, Assyr. namri ‘transparent,’ and to suppose that Beth
Nimra derived its name from the waters. But it has been pointed
out that there are other places with names from the same root, and
that in olden times there were divisions of Arab tribes bearing names
(Namir, Anmar, Nomeyr) strongly suggestive of the panther. The
Syriac writer, Jacob of Sarug, also speaks of bar nemre, ‘the son of
panthers,’ as a false deity of Harran. I find it therefore impossible
to resist the conclusion that in Nimrim, as well as in the other cases,
there is a reference to the panther. What this panther is, will be
clear to those who are convinced by Mr. M‘Lennan’s evidence, that
in widely separated countries a primitive form of worship prevailed
called by him totemism—ze. ‘animals were worshipped by tribes of
men who were named after them and believed to be of their breed.’ It
is certain that the ancient Semitic peoples worshipped many animal
gods, and the most reasonable view is that these were totems or
animal-fetishes. Such a totem to some of the Semitic clans of Syria
and Arabia was apparently the panther, and from this panther the
places called Nimra, Nimara, &c., naturally derived their names.
(See further below, on lxv. 4. Ixvi. 3, 17). So Prof. Robertson Smith,
to whose important paper in the Journal of Philology for 1880 I refer
the reader. I do not, however, see that there is a radical difference
between him and Graf Baudissin as to the import of the animal
deities of the Semites ; for it must be remembered that the planets
were regarded by primitive man (comp, the Accadian term for the
planets, Zuba¢—z.e. ‘a kind of carnivorous quadruped,’ Lenormant)
as having a guasz animal existence.

On xvii. 8 (vol. i. pp. 106-7). Dr. Stade (Gesch. des Volkes Israel,
1881, p 184) and Prof. Robertson Smith (Zhe Old Testament in the
Jewish Church, p. 226) have recently revived the opinion that the
word Ashéra is not the name of a goddess, but means ‘a pole,’ and
that this pole was the symbol of the sacred tree, which stood on or
near the altars of the ‘high places.’ This seems to be opposed, not
only by the occurrence of Asher in Hebrew literature (most probably
to be explained on the analogy of Gad, as originally a divine name),
but also by passages of the Old Testament literature (see 1 Kings
xv. 13, 2 Chron. xv. 16, 2 Kings xxi. 7, where an image of the
Ashérah is spoken of , 2 Kings xxiii. 4, 7, where we find vessels and
tents for the Ashérah ; 1 Kings xviii. rg‘ the prophets of the Baal and
the prophets of the Ashérah’).!_ The truth is that the word Ashérah
has a twofold value in the Old Testament, 1. as a divine name, and 2.
as a material symbol of a divinity.

1 I take these references from Graf Baudissin’s very complete article ‘Aschera’ in
Herzog’s Realencyclopadie, 2nd ed., i. 719-25.

30-4 LAST WORDS ON ISAIAIL,

On xvii. 10 (vol. i. p. 108). In illustration of the Adonis-plants
Lagarde refers to Low’s Avamadische Pflanzennamen, pp. 201, 380.

On chap. xviii. (vol. i. p. 110), In an essay on this chapter
(friends Quarterly Examiner, Oct. 1881), Mr. Hodgkin, the historian
of the Goths in Italy, has attempted a new theory of the meaning,
based upon a careful study of Brugsch-Bey’s History of Egypt. He con-
cludes ‘that in this chapter the prophet warns the world-shadowing
kings of Ethiopia of the insecure tenure by which they hold their
empire. They may send despatch-boat after despatch-boat down the
Nile to summon their vassals of the Delta to their intended campaign
against Assyria, campaigns which are to be commenced at least upon
the often-devastated soil of Palestine. All will not availthem....
Summer and winter will pass over the unburied corpses of the Ethio-
pians and their Egyptian subjects in the land of Israel.’ This theory,
as well as the older one that the Jews are a nation referred to in zz.
2, 7, is due to a want of tact in dealing with the peculiar phraseology
of these verses.

On xviii. 2 (vol. i. p. 111), ‘vessels of papyrus.’ Compare AZ-
moires du duc de Rovigo, i. 94 : ‘On donna la lettre 4 porter 4 un fellah
qui ne prit pas d’autre moyen, pour exécuter sa commission, que de
lier ensemble deux bottes de joncs, sur lesquelles il se placa assis &
la turque, avec sa pipe et un peu de dattes, ne prenant que sa lance
pour se défendre contre les crocodiles, et une petite rame pour se
diriger. Placé ainsi sur cette fréle embarcation, il s’abandonna au
cours du fleuve, et arriva sans accident.’

On xxi. 1-10 (vol. i, pp. 125, 6). Prof. Sayce (Fresh Light from
the Ancient Mfonuments, 1884, p. 181) regards the invasion of Baby-
lonia by Elam and Media there referred to as the invasion of Cyrus,
and describes this as ‘a most interesting testimony to the accuracy of
the Old Testament records.’ In the next paragraph he observes that
the inscriptions have proved that Babylonia was not taken by siege,
but that it opened its gates to the general of Cyrus long before he
came to it. He forgets to notice that this is not in harmony with the
description in Isa. xxi. 1—10, where Babylon is represented as taken
by storm, and its defenders as summoned hastily from a banquet,
reminding us of Dan. v. He does, however, make the suggestive
remark that ‘the siege of Babylon described by Herodotus {and in
Dan. v. ?] really belongs to the reign of Darius, and has been trans-
ferred by tradition to the reign of Cyrus, and that the late Mr.
Bosanquet was right in asserting that the Darius of the Book of
Daniel is Darius the son of Hystaspes.’ The natural inference from
Prof. Sayce’s point of view would surely be that Isa. xxi, 1-10 refers
to the siege of Babylon by Darius in 521 (on which see G. Smith’s
Babylonia, p. 119). But why does he confine his vicw to literal

LAST WORDS ON ISATAH, 305

historical correspondences? why not also look at the neglected re-
quirements of exegesis? And this brings us back to the very point to
which I have tried to bring the discussion in Introd. to xxi. 1-10.

On xxii. 17 (vol. i, p. 137). The view of 133 as a vocative (so
Pesh., A. E., Kimchi, Hitz., Ew.) certainly gives more force to the
passage than any other. The omission of the article under the ex-
citement of feeling ought not to need a justification (comp. Isa. i. 2,
Job xvi. 18).

On xxvi. 8 (vol. i. p. 154). The phrase, the ‘Name,’ or ‘Face,’
of Jehovah is an innocent loan from the current Semitic theology.
The Semitic deities in general were not triads but duads. They were
originally the productive powers of nature, and were grouped in
couples of male and female principles, under the names of Baal and
Baalath (or Baaltis), and Ashtar (or Ashtor) and Ashtoreth, or by a
cross-division, Baal and Ashtoreth. In Eshmunazar’s inscription
(vii. 8, 9, Schlottmann), the king and his mother say that they have
built two houses or temples, the one ‘to the Baal of Sidon,’ and the
other ‘to Ashtoreth or (Astarte), the Name of Baal.’ (Ewald’s ren-
dering—‘ To Asbtoreth of the name of Baal,’ and Dillmann’s ‘To
the heavenly Ashtoreth (wife) of Baal,’ seem to me unnatural.) It is
remarkable that they should have built two temples. This shows
that the Phoenicians had no ‘ monotheistic instinct,’ at any rate in the
fourth century B.c. The compiler of the Book of Kings, however,
can speak indifferently of ‘the house of Jehovah’ and of ‘a house
(built) unto the name of Jehovah’ (1 Kings iii. 1, 2). Compare
Ginsburg’s note on the Ashtar-Chemosh of the Inscription of Mesha
(The Moabite Stone, 1871, p. 43)-

On xxvi. £9 (vol. i. p. 157). ‘Dew,’ more strictly ‘night-mist’ ;
see on xviii. 4. Hosea xiv. 5 is a closer parallel than I have stated.
In Hos. xiii. 15 the parching sirocco destroys all vitality ; there has
been no counteracting ‘ night-mist’ as in the hottest part of the dry
season of Palestine. After an interval, Jehovah promises to heal
(Hos. xiv. 4), and to be ‘as the dew’ (or night-mist) unto Israel.
_ Clearly a ‘dew of lights,’ as explained in my note, expresses what is
in Hosea’s mind.

On xxviii. 18 (vol. i. p. 167). Wellhausen remarks in his note on
the meaning of kapper ‘to atone’ (Geschichte [sraels, ed. 1, p. 66 ;
omitted in ed. 2), that Isa. xxviii. 18 must be passed over, as the
word is quite strange in this passage, and the supposed meaning ‘to
obliterate ’ cannot be proved. Prof. Robertson Smith, however, takes
as the primary meaning of the word, not to ‘cover,’ but ‘to wipe.’ !
This view, if accepted, will justify the rendering doubted by Well-

1 The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, pp. 438--9
VOL. II. x

306 LAST WORDS ON ISAIAH.

hausen, but the correction adopted in the text still remains a very
natural one.

On xxx. 22 (vol. i. p. 178). It is remarkable that in this prophetic
description of the break with Israel’s past which must precede the
conferring of God’s best gifts, nothing is said of the destruction
of the high places. It is only by inference that we can assume the
tacit opposition of Isaiah to the ancient custom of worshipping at
the local sanctuaries—an inference drawn partly from Isaiah’s stress
on the supreme importance of Mount Zion (ii. 2, 3, xxviii. 16, xxix. 8),
and partly from the more or less complete temporary abolition of the
high places, decreed if not accomplished, by the prophet’s royal
friend, Hezekiah. Considering Isaiah’s reserve, is it not more than
probable that Dathe, Roorda, and Kuenen are right in reading ‘the
sin (of Judah)’ (&ha¢¢ath) instead of ‘the high places’ (bamath) in
Mic. i. 5?

‘The plating (or overlaying) of thy golden images,’ This
phrase suggests the true meaning of ‘ ephod’ in narrative passages
(except 1 Sam. ii. 18, xxii. 18, and in Hos. iii. 4), viz. ‘ plated image.’

On xxxvili. 13 (vol. i, p. 230). Hezekiah appeals to Jehovah
against Himself. Comp. Koran, Sura ix. 119, ‘they bethought them
that there was no refuge from God but unto Him.’

On xxxix. 6 (vol. i. p. 240). Dr. Delitzsch, in his review of vol. i.,
has the following remark : ‘ The parallel from Isaiah’s contemporary,
Micah (“Thou shalt go to Babylon,” iv. 10) he passes over very lightly ;
“ Babylon is mentioned there only as a part of the Assyrian empire.”
Certainly, but as the ruling city of the empire of the world, though
that empire be held at the time by Assyria.’ But how is it possible
for Babylon to be mentioned as at the same time a part of the Assyrian
empire, and a symbol of the capital of the imperial power dzAds?
The two significations of Babylon cannot surely be combined. One
is also entitled to ask what evidence there is for this symbolic use of
the term Babylon at so early a date? It is true that ‘the River’—
z.e., the Euphrates—is used once in Isaiah (viii. 7) to represent the
Assyrian empire ; but this is not a parallel case, the expression being
chosen simply in order to produce a striking poetical figure. See
my note on Mic. iv. ro in the Cambridge School edition of Micah,
where the hypothesis of interpolation is advocated, but not on any
arbitrary ground.

On xl. 15 (vol. i. p. 249). Add to the two psalm-passages quoted
in note Ps. Ixv. 6, reading ~ for py (Gratz after the Targum).

On xlv. 14 second half (vol. i. pp. 297-8). This voluntary servi-
tude is yet not servile ; the symbol reminds us of xliv. 5 (clauses 1
and 3). Comp. St. Athanasius, ‘ Because of our relationship to His
(Christ’s) body, we too have become God’s Temple, and in conse-

LAST WORDS ON ISAIAH. 307

quence are made God’s sons, so that even in us the Lord is worshipped,
and beholders report, as the Apostle says, that God is in them of a
truth’ (Select Treatises, Oxford transl., Part I. p. 241). The direct
reference of course is to 1 Cor. xiv. 25, but St. Paul is not improbably
alluding to the prophecy—he says that the heathen visitor ‘shall
worship God,’ but clearly means ‘God in the Church,’ as St. Atha-
nasius explains (comp. my note on Isa. Zc.).

On li. 6. Prof. H. L. Strack remarks, ‘Would not the moth
(wy) be a more likely animal to select for an image of perishableness
(comp. Job iv. 19, xxvii. 18)?’ He would explain as Delitzsch.
But in Job xxvii. 18 we should rather read wrgsy ‘a spider,’ with
Sept. (one of two renderings), Pesh., Merx, and Hitzig. A single
passage of Job does not outweigh the Semitic parallels cited in my
note.

On lii. 13, &c. (The portrait of the Servant.) A combination
of influences, both Biblical and Platonic (comp. above, p. 194,
note'), seems to have produced the outer form of a remarkable
passage in the Wisdom of Solomon (ii. 12-21), which has been too
much overlooked,' and which reminds us of a similar echo of
prophecy in the Sibylline Oracle on the xépy and her royal child
(see on chap. xi., vol. i. p. 75).

On lili. 10. ‘It pleased Jehovah.’ A poet’s words often have
deep and true meanings, of which he was not himself conscious,
but which he would certainly not have disowned. Such a meaning
of the prophet’s expression has been pointed out by Dr. Weir.
‘Obs., it is not God, but Jehovah. We thought him smitten by
Elohim (v. 4); but no. It was by Israel’s God and for Israel’s
sake.’

Wellhausen denies that SW in this passage has the sense
of ‘ guilt-offering ’ ; it means, he says, simply the guilt which is borne
by the innocent for the guilty.2_ As a commentator on Isaiah I am
not called upon to discuss the theory at the root of this bold nega-
tion ; but I will frankly admit that I agree with Ritschl that it is
difficult to say why the word pws should be particularly used here,
and that the ‘simpler solution’ mentioned at the end of my note on
the clause (p. 51) commends itself to my judgment. If we adopt it,
however, must we take the Grafian hypothesis as to the Levitical
legislation into the bargain? We must either do this, or else sup-
pose that this body of laws, though in existence, was not very widely
known. Against the extreme view entertained by Wellhausen on
the point immediately before us (viz. that ‘sin-offerings’ or ‘ guilt-
offerings’ were absolutely unknown prior to the Exile), it may cer-
1 Not, however, I observe, by Dr. Mozley (Zssays, ii. 124).

3 Wellhausen, Geschichte /sraels, i. 76.
B2

308 LAST WORDS ON ISATAH.

tainly be urged (without laying any stress on Isa. i. 11 or 2 Kings
xii. 17) that in Hos. iv. 8, Ps. xl. 6, there are probably references to
the sin-offering, and probably in Prov. xiv. g (see Delitzsch and
Nowack) to the guilt-offering. Moreover in the passage quoted
from the exile-prophet Ezekiel (xl. 39) there is nothing, as Del.
remarks,! to indicate that the sin-offering and the guilt-offering were
of later introduction than the burnt-offering, in combination with
which they are mentioned. Nor are the supposed novelties referred
to at all more frequently by the later writers. Sin-offerings are
mentioned twice (Neh. x. 34, 2 Macc. xii. 43); guilt-offerings only
once (Del. says, not even once ; but in Ezra x. 19, we should pro-
bably point DW with Gratz, Gesch. der Juden, ii. 2, p. 133).

On lxiii. 6. Two of the oldest St. Petersburg MSS. (dated 916
and 1009 respectively) agree with the ordinary printed text, but in
the former 3 has been altered prima manu into 3. See Strack,
Leitschr. f. luth. Theol. 1877, p. 51.

On lxiii. 16, ‘for Abraham taketh no notice of us.’ My note
requires supplementing in two points. First, granting that the
speaker does not intend (as Dr. Weir supposed) to deny that Abraham
and Jacob can ‘take notice’ of their descendants, what precisely is
his meaning? Calvin supposes the argument to be similar to that
in xlix. 15 ; ‘potius enim nature jura cessabunt, quam te nobis
patrem non preebeas,’ but is °3 ever ‘though,’ unless perhaps when
its clause stands first? It is better to follow St. Jerome, and ascribe
the inattention complained of on the part of the patriarchs to the
degeneracy of their descendants ; to apply the language of Deut.
xxxii. 5, the Jews of the Exile were ‘their not-children’—123 iG
z.e. the very reverse of their children. The next question is, whether
the prophet himself is to be supposed to endorse the words which
he utters in the name of the people, or whether he simply conde-
scends to the popular phraseology. On reconsidering my note it
appears to me that the former view is perfectly tenable. The fact
that the continued interest of the ‘saints’ in human affairs was a
belief of the later Jews (comp. Matt. xxvii. 47, 49, and the Talmudic
legends) should not blind the historian to the evidence of its anti-
quity (nor, I may add, to the traces of it in the New Testament—
see Luke xvi. 25-31, ix. 30, 31, John viii. 56, on which see Godet,
Rev. vi. 9-11). Nor can we fairly appeal to those mythic expres-
sions, such as the Face and the Arm of Jehovah, and perhaps the
“hewing Rahab in pieces,’ which are symbols of ideas and pheno-
mena not to be adequately expressed in human language ; for since
the saints are still literally human beings, that which is predicated of

1 Delitzsch, ‘Pentateuch-kritische Studien,’ i, in Luthardt’s Zezfschrift, 1880,
p. 8.

LAST WORDS ON ISAIAH. 309

them must also be intended literally. This belief in the sympathy
of the ‘saints’ corresponds to that in the intercession of angels,
which we have found already in li. 9, Ixii. 6, and which is also pre-
supposed in Job v. 1 (read ‘holy ones,’ ze. angels, for ‘saints,’
xxxiil, 23 (read ‘angel’ for ‘messenger’). It is true that these
beliefs are not brought prominently forward ; they have their roots
too deep in popular feeling. But the evidence of their existence
should not be overlooked by the historian of dogma.

[If I may refer to Calvin again, it is interesting to notice how
his exegetical honesty is balanced by his anxiety not to support the
practice of invoking the saints. He admits that our passage by
no means proves that the faithful departed have no more interest in
human affairs, but he thinks it necessary to give a strong practical
caution against invoking them. Stier, quoting Calvin’s concession,
admits with equal candour that ‘grade das Nicht-anerkennen setzt
eber ein Kennen, das Nichtfiirsorgen doch ein etwelches Wissen um
die Nachkommen voraus.’]

On lxvi. 17, ‘after One in the midst.’ A reference to the wor-
ship of Tammuz or Adonis is perfectly consistent with the composi-
tion of the prophecy in Palestine. There are several certain or
highly probable allusions to this cultus in the prophets. Ezekiel
(viii. 14) expressly refers to the women who sat at the gate of the
outer court of the temple ‘ weeping for the Tammuz’ (ze. the divi-
nised sun of autumn). The refrain of the Adonis-dirge is probably
preserved in Jer. xxii. 18 (where, however, ‘his glory,’ parallel to
‘my sister,’ can hardly be correct); and, in Isa. xvii. 10, we have
already traced an allusion to the Adonis-gardens. After the restora-
tion of the Jews, we find the name Tammuz (in imitation of the
Babylonians) given to the fourth Hebrew month. The cultus of
Adonis lingered on at Bethlehem even in the Christian period,
according to St. Jerome.! In the passage before us, the prophet
says nothing of the ‘weeping’ for Adonis, and Ezekiel, who men-
tions the ‘weeping’ of the Hebrew devotees, is silent as to the
procession.

On Ixvi. 19. ‘ Put and Lud that draw the bow.’ The points of
my note are these: 1. that Pul (the received reading) occurs nowhere
else in the Old Testament, whereas Put (the reading of the Septua-
gint) does, and that in connection with Lud, 2. that Lud being a
N.-African people (see note), it is reasonable to suppose that the
nation coupled with it is also N.-African. From the extreme south
of Spain to northern Africa is an easy transition, but I admit that
Tubal and Javan do not follow quite naturally. True, the names of

1 Opera, ed. Ben., iv, 564 (ep. xlix. ad Paul.)

310 LAST WORDS ON ISAIAH,

places are not always given in geographical order. But it is quite
possible that Wetzstein’s emendation (paleographically a slight one)
of Pul into Pun (ze. Carthage) is correct. From Carthage to Asia
Minor (assuming with Wetzstein that Lud means Lydia) is a natural
transition, and Javan and the maritime countries follow then as a
matter of course. [My friend, Mr. Sayce, is so impressed with the
necessity for bringing these geographical references into a natural
order that (in a private communication) he boldly identifies ‘ Pul’
with the ‘Apuli’ of Central Italy. He remarks, ‘I do not admit
that “ Lud” is a N.-African people in Ezek. xxx. 5. It there means
the Lydian soldiers by whose help Psammetichus made Egypt inde-
pendent of Assyria, and his successors maintained their power.
Ludim, Gen, x. 13, is distinguished from Lud (Lydia) in v. 22.
These Ludim are the Lydian soldiers by whom the power of the
Saitic dynasty was maintained.’ Dr. Stade gets rid of these Ludim
in Gen. Ze and Jer. xlvi. 9, by emending the word into Lubim
‘Libyans.’ (De populo Javan, Giessen, 1880.)]

INDEX.

I. GENERAL.

ABE
ABEN EzRA, see IBN EZRA
Adonis, myth of, i, 108; ii. 116,
127-8, 309
Alexander, Dr. J. A., i. 225, note? ;
li, 283

Alphabets, various, used in Hebrew
writings, ii. 236

Amorites, supposed reference to, ii. 150

Anath, Semitic goddess, i. 74 note!

Anemone, etymology of, i, 108

Angels, belief in guardian, i. 148

Animals, figures from, 1 i. 184

Apologia, Jewish, in II. Isaiah, i, 2915
ii, 289

Apulians, supposed reference to, ii. 310

Arab belief in the soul, ii. 133 xo/e!

Arab poets in Spain, ii, 226

Aramaic, prevalence of, i. 165, 212

Arnold, Mr. Matthew, i. 156, 264; ii.
208, 217

Aroer, i. 105

Ashdod, siege of, i. 122

Asherah and Ashtoreth, worship of, i.
10, 106-7 ; ii. 303

Assurbanipal, Assyrian king, i. 217,
291

Assyrian, illustrations from, i. 13, 17,
32, 44, 45, 68, 71 e¢ passim

Assyrian kings, their boastfulness, i.
219

Astronomy, Babylonian, i. 308 310

Athanasius, St., ii. 306

Atonement, vicarious, ii. 209, 210

BABYLON, captures of, i. 1263 ii. 291,
304 ee : i

Babylonians, religious sentiment of, i.
309

Belshazzar, feast of, i. 128; ii. 291

Beltis, supposed mention of, i. 67; ii.

144

DAR

Bickell, Dr. ‘ Py 70, 76, 88, 195-200,
230; ii. 168, 173

Birks, Prof., i, 202 ; ii, 283, 285

Bochart, ii. 274 ote §

Book of the Dead, quoted, ii. 31

Bosanquet, Mr., the chronologist, i. 227

Boscawen, Mr., i. 229, 235-6, 2773
ii. 128

Bradley, Dean, ii. 227

Bunsen, Baron, on chap. liii., ii. 39

CALVIN, ii. 273, 308

Cambyses, religious policy of, ii, 290

Captivity, Babylonian, reference to,
i. 239; li. 306

Carchemish, site and importance of, i.
70; name of, ii. 300

Chaldzeans, origin of, i. 142; name of,
ii, 153

Chateaubriand, on Job, ii. 259

Cherubim, signification of, i.
218; ii. 159, 296-9

China, Jesuit missionaries in, ii, 22

Chronology of Isaiah’s period, i. 202 ;
ii, 185 (see also table prefixed to
vol. i.)

Conjecture, necessity of critical, i.
237-8

Consciousness, belief in double, ii. 133

Cook, Canon, i. 116-7

Covenant, religious use of the term, i.
2733 Ul. 7, 59, IIT

Cox, Dr. S., il. 237

Crane, character of its note, i. 231

Cyrus, genealogy of, ii. 292

— religious policy of, i.
288-294

38, 115,

304-6 ; ii.

Darius, religious position and policy
of, ii. 290, 293

Ne

DAV

David, house of, i. 46, 75 ; ii. 299-300

Davidson, Prof. A. B., ii. 214, 224, 232

Davidson, Dr. S., ii. 186, 258

De Dieu, ii. 161, 274

Deity, belief in manifoldness of, i.
180 ; ii. 305

Delitzsch, sketch of, ii. 282

— Friedr., i. 134, 169, 210; ii. 139,
150, 157, 159 &c.

Dew, meaning of, in the Old Testa-
ment, i. 1133 ii, 305

Drechsler, sketch of, ii. 281

Driver, Prof. S. R., ii.
162, 172 &c,

147, 161,

EDERSHEIM, Dr., ii. 229 ole, 295

Egypt, Semitic influence on, i. 119

Egyptian, illustrations from, i. 60, 62,
99, 114-119, 177; ii. 31, 122 ef passim

l-gyptians, their view of the next world,
i. 89 mote! ; ii. 132-3

Ephod, meaning of, ii. 306

Eunuchs, Israelitish, ii. 64

Ewald, sketch of, ii. 279-80

Ezekiel, compared with II. Isaiah, ii.
252

FAMILY-IDEA, the, predominant in
Hebrew society, i. 21

Fasting, history of, ii. 78

Felix, Minucius, ii. 234

Forgiveness, doctrine of, i. 161, 194

Fulfilments, circumstantial, ii. 196 &c.

GAD, traces of worship of, ii. 118

Gesenius, sketch of, il. 277

Glosses, in Hebrew text, i. 20, 21, 44,
50, 53-4, 171, 1743 ll. 106, III,
154, 239 oe

Goldziher, Dr., i. 93; ii. 109

Gratz, Dr., ii, 150, 152, 159,
notle', &c.

Greene’s ‘ Hebrew Migration,’ quoted,
li. 225 role?

Grotius, ii. 39, 274

222

HALtvy, M., on the Cyrus-inscrip-
tions, ii. 292-4

Ilardening, judicial, i. go; ii, 2

Heilprin, Mr., i. 135

Henderson, Dr., ii. 283

Hengstenberg, sketch of, ii. 280-1

Hezekiah, is he chargeable with selfish-
ness? i, 241

— Song of, its relation to Job, 1. 228

High places, i, 20, 104, 211

INDEX.

KIM

Hincks, Dr., i. 202

Hitzig, sketch of, ii. 278

Hivites, mention of, i. 107; ii. 150
Hodgkin, Mr., i. 110; ii. 304
Holiness, conception of, i. 3, 28, 38, 63

Inn Ezra, sketch of, ii. 271

Idolatry, i. 18, 20, 71, 106 7

Immanuel, i. 47-49

—, Dr. Bredenkamp on, i. 42

—, Bishop Lowth on, ii. 277

Immortality, i. 151, 233

Incarnations, kings regarded as divine,
i, 90; ii. 301

Isaiah in the light of history, ii. 177

— not arranged chronologically, ii.
179

— partly made up of small collections
of prophecies, ii. 187

— two parts of, compared philologi-
cally, ii. 254-

— links between two parts of, ii. 246-8

— second part of, ils arrangement, ii.
189-191

— — —, its Palestinian references, ii.
225-8

— ——, its few Babylonian allusions,
ii, 232

JasuEr, Book of, i, 283

Javan, ii. 130

Jehovah, day of, i. 83

— prophetic interpretation of name, i.

254

— God of the world, i. 24

— meaning of his return to Palestine,
i. 244

Jeremiah, a type of ‘the Servant,’ ii.
26

—, compared with II. Isaiah, ii. 251

Jerome, St., ii. 269-270

‘Jewish interpretation of prophecy,
the phrase criticised, ii. 272

Job, date of, ii, 243 note!

— its affinities with Isaiah, ii. 44, 45,
132-3, 203 note %, 243, 250, 259-268

Joel, date of, ii. 243 rote!

Jonah, a symbol of Israel, ii. 26, 201

Judaism, is it a proselytising religion ?
i, 284 note '

Judges, power of, in Judah, i. §

Judgment, doctrine of, i. 10, 83, 144

Justification, meaning of, ii. 27, 52

Justin Martyr, i. 48 ; ii. 120, 165

Kay, Dr., sketch of, ii, 283-5
Kimchi, David, ii. 271

INDEX.

KIR

Kir, locality of, i. 134

Kleinert, Dr. Paul, i. 265; ii. 7, 233

Klostermann, Dr., ii. 87, 96, 162-3,
171, 230 note’, 239, 282

Knobel, sketch of, ii, 282

Koppe, ii. 278

Koran, referred to, i. 16, 19, 24, 113,
153, 200, 243, 254, 264, 2943 il.
30, 76, 119, 124, 306

Kuenen, Dr., i. 124, 198, 203, 215,
217 ; ii, 153, 163, 191, 211, 284

— his Hibbert Lectures, ii, 163, 294
note*

LAGARDE, Prof. de, i. 65, 67, 76,
107-8, 393 5 ii. 127-8, 143-5, 150,
165, 237, 239, 240, 295, 299

Land, Dr., ii. 4, 69

Land-tenure, Hebrew law of, i. 31

Lenormant, M., i. 207, 209, 254; ii.
297 &c.

Light, pre-solar, i. 157

Lilith, or, the night-hag, i. 197

Lowth, Bishop, sketch of, ii. 276-7

Lydians, supposed mention of, ii. 129,
310

Lyra, Nicolas de, ii. 270

MAGIC, i. 17, 22, 46, 56, 308; ii. 295

Martensen, Bishop, i. 9

Martineau, Dr. James, ii, 263

Maurice, F. D., ii. 196

Medes, use of term, i. 85

Mercerus, a French commentator, ii.
27

Mone, Jewish doctrine of, ii. 109-110

Merodach, Babylonian god, i. 158, 302

Merx, Dr., ii. 270-1 £

Messiah and Messianic, meaning of, ii.
198, 222-3

—, the suffering, ii. 217-224

Milman, Dean, ii. 276-7

M’ni, traces of worship of, ii. 118

Moabite Stone, referred to, i. 97-8,
104, 207, 3003; ii. 149, 305 (also
Addenda)

Moloch, sacrifices to, i. 182; ii. 70

Mozley, Dr., i. 230; ii. 267-8, 307

Musculus, a commentator, ti. 273,

Myrtle, late references to, i, 258; ii.
226 note”

Mythology, embodied in popular re-
ligious phrases, i. 6, 9, 12, 23, 38;
54, 84, 86, 95, 158, 180, 197, 233,
246, 269, 294; ii. 31

NABONIDUS, fall of, ii. 291

313
RAS

Naegelsbach, sketch of, ii. 283

Names, symbolism of, i. 56, 169

Nature, regeneration of, i. 19, 77, 172,
188 ; ii. 120-1

Nebo, Babylonian god, i. 302

Nebuchadnezzar, ii. 301

Neubauer, Dr., i. 53; ii. 172, 272

Nisroch, obscure name of Assyrian god,
i, 224

OLympus, Oriental
Mount, i. 16, 91

Onias, temple built by, i. 115

Origen, referred to, ii. 7, 229 xote®

Origenists, doctrine of, on evil spirits,
i. 149

Osiris, supposed mention of, i, 67 ; ii.
194 note', 300

equivalents of

PALMER, Prof. E. H., i. 102

Papyrus, the, i, 111, 117, 199

Parallel passages, critical study of, ii.
241, &.

— argument from, ii. 234

Pauthier, M., ii. 21

gern Smith, Dean, ii. 70, 233, 252,
207

Pellicanus, a commentator, ii. 273

Perowne, Dean, i. 56; ii. 142, 226
note *

Pheenician, illustrations from, i. 92,
104, 107, 140, 154; ii. 69, 153

Pillars, erection of to Jehovah, not for-
bidden, i. 120

Plumptre, Dean, i.
288

Predestination, a Semitic doctrine, i.
28, 292; ii. II

Prophecy, i. 26, 36, 226, 242; ii. 290

— creative and self-fulfilling, i. 63, 76,
268 ; ii. 3, 11, 177 rode !

— fictitious Assyrian, i, 291-2

— Egyptian, i. 85 wote', 118

Prophetic writers, their self-abnegation,
il, 241

Psalms, Christian element in the, ii.
197, &c.

— inprecatory, ii. 202

Punishment, everlasting, doctrine of,
ii, 133-4

Pusey, Dr., ii. 51 so¢e ', 131, 139-140,
167-8

13, 290; ii. 285,

QUEEN-MOTHER, rank of, i. 47

RASHI, ii, 270-1

314
RAW

Rawlinson, Sir Henry, i. 202, 304; 1.
289-290

Remnant, doctrine of, i. 103 ii. 13

Renouf, Mr. le Page, i. 118, 215, 298

Resurrection, doctrines of, i. 157

Righteousness, meanings of term, in
II. Isaiah, i. 266, 294; ii. 1, 8

Rig-veda, quoted, i. 33

Rochester, Earl of, ii. 208

Roman Catholic exegesis, ii, 272

Row, Prebendary, ii. 101

Riickert, Frederick, ii. 189

Rutgers, Dr., i. 199, 272, 274; ii. 4

SAADYAH, i, 294; ii. 39, 165, 170,
269

Sabbath, history of, ii. 62-3 :

Saints and angels, doctrine of, ii. 31,
108-9, 309

Salvation, meaning of, i. 80

Samaria, supposed second kingdom of,

1. 45

Sargon, did he invade Judah ? i. 68-9,
203-4; ii. 181, 183-5

Sayce, Prof., i. 68, 203, 211, 213; ii.
130, 292-3, &c.

Schiller-Szinessy, Dr., i. 264 xole'; ii.
266, 288

Schrader, Dr., i. 11,68, 205-8, 235, &c.

Schultens, Albert, ii. 275

Scripturists, see Soferim

Sennacherib, his invasion of Judah, i.
189, 201, &c. ; ii. 183

— his character, i. 205

Septuagint, critical value of, ii. 239

Seraphim, i. 37-8; ii. 296

‘Servant of Jehovah,’ special meaning
of the phrase, ii. 211-217

Shedl, i. 32, 89-92, 229; ii. 132-4

Sibylline oracles, i. 753; ii. 307

Siloam, inscription of, i. 72 note, 136

Sinim, land of, ii. 20-23

Smerdis, pseudo-, ii. 293

Smith, Prof. Robertson, i. 67-8, 83,
169; ii. 112, 124, 145-6, 154, 280,
300, 303, 305

Soferim, i. 21; ii, 228-231

Solomon, Song of, supposed meaning
of, ii. 201

Souls, primitive theory concerning, ii.
132

Spirit, doctrine of the, ii. 7, 105-6

Stade, Dr., i. 107 ; ii. 154, 303, 310

Stanley, Dean, i. 30; ii. 194

Stars, once regarded as animated, i. 12

Steinthal, Dr., ii. 31 z0¢e ?

Stier, sketch of, ii. 282

INDEX.

ZOR

Stones, sacred, i. 166; ii, 71

Strachey, Sir E., i. 76, 109, 123, 163,
180, 238-240, 255; ii. 285

Strack, Dr. H. L., ii. 156, 240, 307

Strauss, Dr. F., ii. 197, 211

Stuart, Dr. Moody, ii. 229, 246

Style, argument from diversity of, ii.
232-3 :

Swift, character of its note, i. 231

Swine, flesh of, why forbidden, ii.
115-6

Sword, mystic Divine, i. 158, 195

oe ama (or Boorus), Feast of,

i, 181

Tattooing, supposed allusion to, i. 284

Tertullian, ii. 194 xote', 234

Text, relatively weak authority of
Hebrew, ii. 235-7

Thothmes III., his conquests in Pales-
tine, i. 99

Tiele, Prof., i. 38, 107, 139

Tirhakah, is the name correct? i. 110

Toilette, Hebrew ladies’, i. 24

Tomkins, Rev. H. G., ii. 156, 296

Torments, future, ii. 132-4

Totem-worship, relics of Semitic, ii.
123-4, 303 See

Transcription, sources of error in, ii.

235-6
Trench, Archbishop, i. 4, 269
Trent, Council of, ii, 272
Types, ii. 195

UNION, mystic, i. 8, 286, 297

VITRINGA, sketch of, ii. 275
Vogiié, M. de, ii. 235-6

WELLHAUSEN, Dr., i. 169, 170, 2243
ii. 154, 159, 184-5, 301, 307

Williams, Dr. Rowland, i. 179, 238

Wines, Mesopotamian, ii. 226 no/e'

Woman, honour paid to, in Messianic
descriptions, i. 274

Wordsworth, Prof. J., ii. 158

ZECHARIAH, date of latter part of, ii.
243 note’, 245 note ®

Zinzendorf, Count, ii. 215 zote!

Zoroastrianism, its relation to Judaism,
i, 76, 151, 157, 248, 261, 294; ii.
120-1, 126, 294

INDEX.

315

II. PASSAGES, CHIEFLY BIBLICAL, ILLUSTRATED.

*,* The first numerals refer to the chapter and verse ; the second to the

volume and page.

Gen. i. 2, i. 146

Ex. vi. 24, 25, ii. 144

— xxill, 20-23, ii, 105

— Xxxili. 14, ll. 105

Numb. xiii. 33, ii. 166

Deut. xvi. 21, 22, i, 120

— xxxii. 8, i. 148

Judg. x. 16, ii. 105

I Sam. xiv. 47, ii. 57

— xxviii. 14, 15, i. 89

1 Kings ix. (Jehu), i. 237

— xviii. 5, i. 1

2 Kings iii. 25, i. 97

2 Chron. xxxvi. 22, 23, i. 305

Ezra x. 19, ii. 308

Job xi. 6, ii. 295

— xi. 7, 8, i. 46

— xiv, 21, 22, ii. 108 zo¢e?, 133

— xvi. 17, ii. 49

— xix. 25, ii. 161

— xxvi. 12, 13, i. 158

— xxvii. 18, ii, 307

— xxxviii, 5, i. 247

— xxxviii. 6, i. 166

Psalm ii., ii. 199

— ii. 7, i. 263

— xvii. 15, i. 7

— xviii. ii, 201

— xviii. 36, ii. 74

— xviii. 50, ii, 198

— xxii, ii. 14, 15, 197 zo¢e!, 202-3

— xxii. 15, ii, 121 note}

— xxii. 16, ii. 197

— xxii. 26, 29, i. 150

— xxxi. (authorship), ti. 192 xoZe?

— xxxiv., ii. 197 mole *

— xxxv., li, 202

— xli., ii, 202

— xlv. 6, i. 62 m0¢e}

— xlvi.-xlviii. (Isaianic affinities of),
ii. 245

— xlvi. 4, i. 53, 193

— xlviil. 2, 7, 1. 193

— xlix. 12, i. 137

— li. 14, ii. 75

— lv, ii. 202

— Ixi., Ixili, (authorship of), i. 257
note*

— Ixv. 6, ii, 306

— Ixxii., ii. 199- 200

— Ixxviii. 25, i. 71

— Ixxxii. i, 148

— Ixxxiii. 8 (9), i. 121

— Ixxxvii., ii. 200

— Ixxxix., ii, 60

The list is, of course, very incomplete, but will repay study,

Psalm Ixxxix. 10, ii. 31
— Ixxxix. 27, ii. 41
— xci. 9, i. 262

— cili., ii. 201-2

— cii. 28, i. 255

— cvii. 3, ii. 16, 165
— cx. I, i. 63, ii. 200
— cxviii. 22, i. 166
— cxix. 36, ii. 75

— cxlvii. 4, 5, i. 252
Prov. ix. 10, i, 251
Eccles. xii. 5, i. 137
Jer. ii. 31, i. 299

— vi. 13, ii. 75

— ix. 2, ii. 192

— xv. I, ii, 209

— xxi. II, 12, i. 46
— xxi. 13, i. 134

— xxvi. 21, i, 22

— xlviii. 12, 13, i. 103
— xlviii. 32, 33, i. 102-3
Lam. v. 22, ii. 55
Ezek. i. 10, ii. 298

— vi, 2, 3, il, 226

— viii. 10, II, ii, 123
— x. 14, ii, 298

— xii. 11, i. 56

— xxviii. 13-16, ii. 297
— xxx. I7, 1, 120

— xxxii. 27, i, 89

— xxxili. 24, ii, 28-9
— Xxxvii. I-10, i. 156
— xl. 39, ii. 308

Dan. iv. 13, il. 99

— vii. 13, ii. 187

Hos. ii. 13, ii. 63

— vi. 2, i, 156

— xii. 4, 5, ii. 109

— xiv. 5, ii. 305

Joel iii. 14, i. 134
Am. viii. 10, ii, 127 note *
Jonah iv. 11, i. 161
Mic. i. 5, ii. 306

— i. 7, i. 74

— iv. 1-4, i. 15

— iv. 10, i. 240, ii, 306
—v. 5, i. 240, 266
Hab. iii. 8, ii, 126
Zeph. ii. 1, ii. 155
Zech. ix. 9, il. 221-2
—x. II, i. 74

— xii. I, i, 266

— xiii. 7, i. 163

— xiv. 16-19, i. 121
Mal. i. 11, i, 120, 261

316

Mal. iii. 1, i. 266

— iii. 17, i, 263 note
Matt, iii. 9, i, 284

— viii. 11, i. 150

— XXxvi. 13, ii. 65
Mark ii. 10, 11, i. 194
Luke xiii. 33, i. 134
John xviii. 5, 6, i. 255
— xviii. 37, ii. 60
Acts viii. 27, ii, 64 note
Rom. xv. 16, ii. 130

INDEX.

1 Cor. xiv. 25, ii. 307
Gal. iv. 1, i. 263 ole?
— vi. 17, i. 284

Phil. iv. 7, i, 153

1 Tim. iv. Io, i. 80

2 Tim. i. 10, i. 233
Heb.. iv. 12, ii. 12

— xi. 12, ii. 28

Rev. i. 5, ii. 60

— vi. 16, ii, 34

— xxi. 10, i, 246

APOCRYPHA, ETC.

x Mace. iii. 45, i. 146

— x. 51-66, i. 115

2 Mace. viii. 30, i. 194
Sirach xxxviii. I, ii. 57

— xxxix. 4, ii. 262

Wisd. Sol. ii. 12-31, ii, 307
— xi. 20, i, 248

Baruch iv., ii. 17

— vi. 18, i. 293

Enoch v. 9, ii. 120

Pirke Aboth iii. 16, i. 151
— iii. 25, iv. 23, i. 150
Sota ix. 14, ii. 97

III. ILLUSTRATIONS FROM LITERATURE.

Burns, i. 36

Calderon, ii. 212

Coleridge, i. 56

Dante, i. 24, 72, 151, 247, 265; ii.
69, 73, 102, 108, 212, 261

Dryden, i. 261

Emerson, i. 271

Goethe, i. 36, 52, 278; ii. 261-2

Ilawthorne, ii. 229

Ileine, ii. 64

Herodotus, i. 112, 217; ii. 122

Ilomer, i. 35, 147, 183, 307

Horace, ii. 157

Juvenal, i. 220

Leopardi, ii. 263

Lucian, i. 89

Macaulay, i. 158

Marlowe, i, 12

Milton, i, 16, 60, 197, 228, 247, 293

Pascal, i, 265

Persius, i. 65

Plato, i. 108; ii. 194

Rovigo, duc de, ii. 304

Seneca, ii. 194, 224, 234

Shakspere, i. 18; ii. 17, 170, 234

Spenser, ii. 8

Thucydides, i. 256

Virgil, i. 53, 88, 179, 192; ii. 62, 85,
128

Wordsworth, i. 12, 53
Young, i. 255

IV. ETYMOLOGIES, ETC. (Jncomplete.)

Adrammelech, i. 225
Ahriman, ii. 218 ole*
Ariel, i. 169; ii. 155
Asnapper, li. 139
Caleb, ii. 123
Chisleu, i. 84

Cyrus, i. 290-1
Esar-haddon, i. 225
Jeshurun, i. 283
Moses, ii, 142
Nimrim, ii. 302-3

Rab-saris, i. 210
Rab-shakeh, i, 210
Rahab, i. 176; ii. 31
Sabaoth, i. 5, 11-14
Sarezer, i. 225
Sargon, i. 123
Sennacherib, i. 210
Sepharvaim, i. 216-7
Shaddai, i. 83; ii, 148
Tartan, i. 123
Topheth, ii. 156

Din ii. 148
DN ‘hyenas’ ii. 148, 288
— ‘far lands’ ii, 162
DWN il, 307-8
Na i. 267 note’; ii, 162
baba ii, 151
“9 ii, 168
yA i. 167
baat ii, 172-3
won ii. 150
“IN? i. 193
bg: i 179
“HD ii. 154, 210 wore”, 305
a3 li, 298°
bor ii. 150
DIY ii. 116
paYID i. 264
$79 ii. 159

INDEX, 317

yo) i. 149

13D i, 2613; ii. 153

nipdy i. 475 ii, 139-141
wy ii. 169

Nypoy ii. 142-3

TBP ii. 149

os i. 196

DD? ii. 159

Dp W i. 37

IW i. 83; ii. 148

Maw rw ii. 166

SNW ii. 164

spy il. 161

MBM i. 5, 55

Nifal tolerativum, ii. 168
Precative perfect, ii. 162
Semitic compounds, ii. 142
Suffix 2 or ém 3s. m., ii, 141, 168
Vav of association, ii, 139

THE END.

rye:

ee

ae

ats
Si %; 7

re